Mekab v Tradco Shipping Ltd [2018] SBHC 27; HCSI-CC 357 of 2017 (5 March 2018)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CIVIL JURISDICTION
(KENIAPISIA; PJ)
Civil Case Number 357 of 2017

BETWEEN: SARAH TAMBE MEKAB - Claimant

AND: TRADCO SHIPPPING LIMITED - Defendant

Date of Hearing: 19^th February 2018.
Date of Ruling: 5^th March 2018.

Mr. N. Laurere for the Applicant/Defendant.
No Appearance for the Claimant/Respondent.

KENIAPISIA; PJ:

RULING ON AN APPLICATION TO STRIKE - RULE 9. 75 (B) and (C)

1. In deciding whether to strike the claim out on the grounds of no reasonable cause of action and abuse of court process, I ask the following pertinent questions/tests on the basis of the well-known Tikani case:
   
   1. Does the claim have some chance of success or has a tenable cause been disclosed for the relief sought?
      
   2. Does the statement of case disclosed some questions or issues fit to be decided by trial or is the cause of action certain to fall.
      
   100. Is the claim one which no reasonable person could treat as bona fide and contend that it is a grievance, claimant is entitled to bring before the court?
        
2. Court considered the statement of case and the sworn statement used by the applicant. Court is satisfied that the claim must fail on the three tests alluded to above.
   
3. Even if Tradco Shipping Limited (defendant) is an agent of the ship owner (QT Marine Research and Exploration) liability for environment damage caused by the ship; will lie against the owner, or the ship, not the agent. Agents like the defendant are normally engaged at the discharging port to do cargo clearance related services amongst other off-loading duties at the berthing port^[1]. The kind of liability or relief sought in this claim are rightly, lawfully and logically tenable against the ship owner or the ship directly not the agent. For the agent does not assume operational responsibility over the navigating of the ship; in this case a foreign owned vessel^[2].
   
4. Accordingly, I found that the claim has no chance of success or that no tenable cause has been disclosed for the relief sought. I agree that a wrong party has been sued. By suing a wrong party, the claim is one which no reasonable person could treat as bona fide and contend that it is a grievance, claimant is entitled to bring before the court. I also found that the statement of case do not disclose issues fit to be decided by trial; for the same reasons outlined in paragraph 3 above.
   
5. Orders of the court:
   

5.1. Claim is dismissed.

5.2. Cost on standard basis in favour of the defendant.

THE COURT

------------------------------
JOHN A KENIAPISIA
PUISNE JUDGE

---

^[1] Court take judicial notice of this.
^[2] M.V Qing.