Kirite'e v Boboro [2016] SBHC 19; HCSI-CC 317 of 2015 (19 February 2016)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
Civil Jurisdiction

Civil Case No. 317 of 2015

BETWEEN:

FANGIDUA KIRITE'E
Claimant

AND:

ELISHA FAITE'E BOBORO & NATHANIEL DAMUSIA (Representing themselves and members of Saenaua tribe)
Defendants

Date of Hearing: 17th February 2016
Date of Ruling: 19th February 2016

Mr. N. Laurere for the Claimant
Mr. E. Faite'e Boboro in Person for the Defendants

RULING ON AN APPLICATION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

KENIAPISIA PJ:

1. Claimant filed a category A Claim on 17/7/15. Claim was served on the second named defendant three days later on 20/7/15[1]. On 6/8/15, the defendant filed a response to the claim. In oral submissions, Elisha who appeared personally as the first named Defendant says he prepared a statement of response and delivered the same to the High Court registry in Honiara, through his cousin brother.
2. Defendant Elisha submitted that the Public Solicitor Office (PSO) in Auki refused to render legal aid to them. They did not have money to engage a private lawyer. Therefore he filed a statement of response personally and delivered the same to the High Court registry, in Honiara.
3. Court's file did support the submissions by Elisha. That a statement of response is in file. Being a lay person, Elisha referred to it as a statement of response. If it were prepared by a lawyer, we should call it a defence or statement of defence. I simply call it a defence. I looked at the defence against the requirements for a defence in Rule 5.11 – Rule 5.16, and indeed it is lacking the proper form and substance, in terms of pleadings. Nevertheless it is still a defence – for instance it denies the claim and it contains a statement of case (Rule 5.12). It is the work of a lay person, not a qualified lawyer and hence the apparent defects in pleadings.
4. Counsel Laurere admitted seeing it in file but to him it was not a defence and denies service of it on him. Claimant must deal with that defence. Claimant cannot jump over that defence and apply for default judgment. Claimant must deal with that defence in one of the following ways:

(1). Apply to strike out the defence.
(2). Apply for summary judgment.
(3). Prepare the matter for trial.

5. I therefore decline the application for default judgment and order that the claimant deal with the defence on file.
6. The defendant too needs ample time to seek legal assistance. I grant an extension of time for the defendant to seek legal assistance and to file a defence with assistance of a lawyer by end of May 2016. Matter will be mentioned again on 7/6/16, at 9.30 am. Costs in the cause. Meantime, the Court grants grace period to the defendant till end of May, 2016. Within that grace period, the claimant is stayed from exercising his rights as discussed in paragraph 4 above.

THE COURT

JOHN A KENIAPISIA
PUISNE JUDGE

---

^[1] See sworn statement of proof of service by John Suifasia, filed 30/7/2015.