Riahanikeni v Waiki [2011] SBHC 182; HCSI-CC 297 of 2010 (8 November 2011)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
(Mwanesalua J)

Civil Case No. 297 of 2010

BETWEEN:

ROBERT RIAHANIKENI
(Representing the Apaniasi Tribes of West Are' Are, Malaita Province)
Claimant

AND:

PETER WAIKI, GODFREY ANITARAU AMOS KAURAHU, MOSES HAOMAERIHU, and JOHN RIRIOA-
(Carrying or trading under the name "Iruhau Resources Development Company")
1^st Defendants

AND:

SONIC PHASE (SI) COMPANY LIMITED
2nd Defendants

AND:

BEN ROHOANA, PETER TAHINAO GODFREY AHIKAU,
JOHN MARK KOARAENA, WILLIAMS SU'UNORUA
BERNARD MAURAU And ALOYISIUS HOUNIMAO
(Representing Aihimu Log Pond Committee)
3rd Defendants

Date of Hearing: 14 October 2011
Date of Ruling: 8 November 2011

Ipo for Claimant
Katahanas for Defendants

RULING

Mwanesalua J:

1. This is an application for variation of Interim Order made on 20 October 2010. That Order restrained the First and Second Defendants from entering and carrying on logging operations in Apaniasi and Aihiku Customary Land and the use of the log pond, roads, buildings and related facilities.

2. This application is supported by Mr Sia Yuk Uk, the logging Camp Manager and employee of the Second Defendant. The application is opposed by the Claimant. The Claimant is a representative of the Apaniasi tribe in West Are'Are, in Malaita Province.

3. Although variation is opposed, no practical solution has been offered to compensate any interested party who may suffer loss or damage resulting from such objection.

4. The First and Second Defendants have complied with the terms of the Interim restraining Order. However, the Applicants say that all negotiation to allow the sale and removal of logs currently in the Auhiku log pond and the trucking of all logs felled in other land areas outside of the disputed land owned by other landowners has failed.

5. All the logs which are affected by the Interim Order have deteriorated to the point they may be rejected by overseas buyers or their sales price would have significantly dropped. Not only the Defendants would suffer loss but also the owners of the logs whose timber royalties would depend on the sales price of logs if and when the logs were eventually sold.

6. The Defendants went on to say that the land and resource owners affected by the Interim Order have lodged complaints to the Forestry Division of the Ministry of Forestry and Research, and the demands for payment of high royalties have been made to the First and Second Defendants.

7. The Defendants have given reasons for seeking to vary the interim order referred to above. If variation is refused by the Court, the logs would rot away causing loss to the Defendants, the landowners in terms of royalties, and no doubt the state, in relation to export revenue. In the circumstances, the variation of the Order sought by the First and Second Defendants is granted. Order accordingly.

THE COURT