Mane v Might Tiasa (SI) Company Ltd [2014] SBHC 133; HCSI-CC 463 of 2011 (20 October 2014)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
(Mwanesalua J)

Civil Case No. 463 of 2011

BETWEEN:

AARON MANE
(Representing himself and his Koramata Tribe)-
Applicant

AND :

MIGHT TIASA (SI) COMPANY LTD
First Respondent

AND:

FREDA TAHU AND KENNETH TAKI
(Trading as Pacific Logging Company
Second Respondent

AND:

COMMISSIONER OF FOREST RESOURCES
Third Respondent

Date of Ruling: 20 October 2014

Mr. Rano for the Applicant
Mr. Lepe for First and Second respondents
No Appearance for the Third Respondent

RULING

Application and Orders Sought. The Applicant is Mr. Aaron Mane. He represents himself and his Koramata Tribe. He seeks the following interim orders:

(a) That the First and Second Respondents be restrained, whether by themselves, their servants or agents or otherwise, from entering, carrying out any construction of any kind, cutting, felling or removing tress within the disputed land, until further orders;

(b) An order that all proceeds of logs extracted from the disputed area be restrained and paid into an interest bearing account in the joint names of solicitors for the parties within 14 days;

(c) An Order that the First and Second Respondents provide by way of Sworn Statement records of all logs extracted and exported to date from the disputed area by quantity, volume, specie and price within 14 days;

(d) An order that a penal notice be attached with the interim injunctive order with notice to OIC, Isabel Province to carry out the terms of the interim order, and

(e) Costs in the Cause.

First Defendant. The First Defendant is Mighty Tiasa (SI) Company Limited. There is no address nor further information regarding this company in the court file.

Second Respondent. The Second Respondent is a Business Name registered by Freda Tahu and Kenneth Taki on 19 May 2006, and was later incorporated as a private company under the Companies Act (Cap. 66) on 25 July 2007 by the owners of the company.

Concession Area. The concession Area in this case is called Raerade Customary Land in the Hograno District, Isabel Province. A development consent was granted by the Third Respondent to the First and Second Respondents on 21 September 2011. The Isabel Provincial Executive sat at Kosisi Village to hear timber rights over Raerade on 28 September 2007. The Timber Rights Agreement was signed and duty was paid on 29 May 2008. And the Felling Licence No. A10640 was issued to the Second Respondent on 25 February 2008.

Koramata Land. The Customary ownership of Koramata land was considered and awarded to the Claimants Tribe by the Local Court in 1997. The boundaries of this land went through Totoru, Thinau, IIente, Kunao, Rarade, then across the river to Horosare, Patubona, then down the Kanipito river to vale and along the coast to Totoru.

Complaint by the Claimant. The Claimant alleged that the First and the Second Respondents encroached on Koramata Land and harvested Logs there unlawfully. In addition to their Application, they filed a claim against the First and the Second Respondents for general and exemplary damages for negligence against the Third Defendant.

Has Koramata Tribe lost ownership of Koramata Customary before the Chiefs? In his Sworn Statement of 20 March 2012, Mr. Ezekiel Kokomana asserted that Karamate Tribe lost their case before the West Hograno House of Chiefs which sat at Kava Village in the Isabel Province. This was not so because but the decision was reviewed by the west Bugotu Panel of Chiefs later as the result of which the tribe regained ownership of their land. The Bugotu Panel of Chiefs found that the Hograno House of Chiefs cast votes to reach their decision. The Bugotu Panel of Chiefs decided such process to be wrong in custom. The Chiefs then restored customary ownership of the land to the Koramata Tribe. None of the parties in that case appealed that decision to the Isabel Customary Land Appeal Court. (See the Sworn Statement of Mr. William Havimana filed on 18 July 2013.

There are overlaps between the boundaries of the First and Second Defendants' concession area with the boundaries of Koramata Customary Land. The court knows from this case that Civil Case of 27 of 2011 which was previous consolidated with this case has been discontinued.

This court is aware that the boundaries and the ownership of the customary lands mentioned in the Local Court decision regarding the Koramata Customary Land are before the Isabel Customary Land Appeal Court for hearing and determination. For the main time, the interim orders sought by the Applicant are granted in aid of the Isabel Customary Land Appeal Court. Costs in the Cause.

THE COURT