Pilaha v Bako [2013] SBHC 67; HCSI-CC 416 of 2011 (12 June 2013)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
(Mwanesalua J)

Civil Case No. 416 of 2011

BETWEEN :

WILSON PILAHA, MICHAEL BELAMA
AND CLEMENT ALOVI
(Representing the Packer Clan)
Claimants

AND:

NELSON BAKO, DANNY BAKO AND
LUKE ETA
(Trading as West Barora Ite Forest Resources)
First Defendant

AND:

SUNWAY (SI) LIMITED
Second Defendant

Hearing: 8 April 2013
Ruling : 12 June 2013

Mr. Tegavota for the Claimant
Mr. Tagini for the Defendants

RULING

1. This is an application filed on 5 July 2012 by the Claimants for contempt of court dated 14 November 2011 by the Defendants.
   
2. The court orders date 14 November 2011 are in these terms: 1. All royalties proceeds payable from log shipments that the first and second defendants will make out of West Barora Ite Customary land commencing from this coming shipment on or about 4 November 2011; (a) are hereby restrained and (b) shall be paid and continued to be paid into a joint trust account in the name of the solicitors for the parties until further orders; 2. The First and the Second Defendants are to file sworn statements in response within 14 days from the date hereof 3; and the First and Second Defendants are to file sworn statements in response within 14 days from the date hereof.
   
3. Mr. Michael Belama filed sworn statement on 5 July 2012 in support of the application. He deposed that as from 9 November 2011 all royalty proceeds are restrained and paid into a joint account in the name of the Solicitors for the First and Second Defendants; the Defendants made 7 shipments at the total SBD for value of $11,079,445.54. Royalties for landowners in respect of 6 shipments owned $11,451,787.50. On 2 February 2012 the sum of $260,000.00 was released to the parties under consent order deducted from total royalties. If the Defendant complied with the court order the sum of $1,119,787.50 would have been paid into trust fund of the parties' solicitors.
   
4. There is evidence that the sum of $260,000.00 was withdrawn by the Claimants and the Defendants from royalty proceeds. It is clear that both parties were withdrawing royalties for their own benefits in breach of the court order. It seems that the Claimants have not come to court with clean hands.
   
5. The Claimants have failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the breach of the orders were merely committed by the Defendants. In the circumstances, this application is dismissed and each party is to pay their own costs. This claim is to be mentioned in court on 9:30am on 11 July 2013.
   

THE COURT