Lilo v Sade [2023] SBHC 116; HCSI-CC 516 of 2018 (12 September 2023)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Case name:	Lilo v Sade
Citation:
Date of decision:	12 September 2023
Parties:	Dick Lilo v Wendy Sade, Commissioner if Lands, Registrar of Titles
Date of hearing:	21 March 2023 and 15 July 2023
Court file number(s):	516 of 2018
Jurisdiction:	Civil
Place of delivery:
Judge(s):	Kouhota; PJ
On appeal from:
Order:	For these reasons I give Judgment for the Claimant and grant the orders sought. Cost for Claimant to be taxed if not agreed.
Representation:	Lagobe C for the Claimant Kwaiga L for the First Defendant Pitry B for the Second and the Third Defendant
Catchwords:
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:
Cases cited:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CIVIL JURISDICTION

Civil Case No. 516 of 2018

BETWEEN

DICK LILO
Claimant

AND:

WENDY SADE
First Defendant

AND:

COMMISSIONER FOR LANDS
Second Defendant

AND:

REGISTRAR OF TITLES
Third Defendant

Date of Hearing: 21 March 2023 and 15 July 2023
Date of Ruling: 12 September 2023

Lagobe C for the Claimant
Kwaiga L for the First Defendant
Pitry B for the Second and Third Defendant

JUDGMENT

The Claimant filed on 12^th December 2018 filed a category (A) claim against the Defendant. The Claimant amended his claim on 17^th June 2021. The Amended claim seek the following orders,

1. A declaration that the Notice before Forfeiture dated March 27^th 2014, relating to Fixed Term Estate, better describe as Parcel Number 191-039-400 void ab initio.
2. A Declaration that the Commissioner for Lands for the Solomon Islands acted ultra vires in relation to;
   1. The Forfeiture of Fixed Term Estate, better describe as parcel number 191-039-400;
   2. The allocation and or reallocation of the Fixed Term Estate, better describe as parcel number 191-039-400 to Wendy Sade ["First Defendant"]
3. A declaration that the registration of Fixed Term Estate, better described as parcel number 191039-400, to the First Defendant void ab initio.
4. That the Registrar of Titles, and or the Commissioner of Lands for the Solomon islands do all acts and things necessary to cause the Fixed Term Estate, better describe as parcel number 191039-400 to be reinstated and or rectified pursuant to section 229 of the Land and Titles Act in favour of Dick Lilo.
5. Cost on indemnity basis.
6. Such further or other orders as the Court deems fit.

Mr Lilo gave oral evidence in Court and confirm that the content of his sworn statement filed on the 18^th of December 2018 was true and correct and was cross examined on his sworn statement. This sworn statement was admitted as evidence for the purposes of the trial. In answer to the cross examination Mr Lilo states that he did not received Notice before Forfeiture issued by the Commissioner of Lands as he was no longer at Buala and says his address is Munda. He said that he did not change his name and address from Buala to Munda. He says the property was in his name but it was given to another woman.

The Defendant Wendy Sade also gave evidence and confirm that the content of her sworn statement filed on 25^th February 2020 which was admitted as evidence. In cross examination she confirmed that she worked with the Ministry of Lands and part of her job was to deal with lands and that she was aware of the Lands Board and says it was established in 2014. She also said that she know a little bit about functions of the Land Board. She gave evidence that she applied for land at Lengakiki LOT 1804/111/ H Lengakiki. She said she surrender the land, and the Second Defendant was obliged to find alternative land for her. In January 2016 she enquire with the Second Defendant and was advice to apply for a Forfeited land at Vura 3. On 8^th January she applied for the land parcel number 191-039400. She says she was offered the land.

In her sworn statement filed on 25^th February 2023 she deposed the following that, she believe that the grant of parcel number to the Claimant was made on 6^th October 2009 and that the Claimant was obliged to develop it within 18 months by 6^th March 2011. She confirm in her sworn statement that the land was transferred to her on 19^th February 2018 and said that the approval made by the Second Defendant to her and registration of her interest were based on the fact that her application and offer of 28^th November 2014 were prior to amendment to the Lands and Title Act and so did not require the approval of the board. She says the Notice of Forfeiture was served on the Claimant 16^th October 2014 by registered mail to his last known address. After, the Registrar of the High Court confirmed there was no appeal against the Forfeiture so the Second Defendant issued a fresh grant instrument to her over parcel Number 191-038-400 on 19^th February 2018.

The Second Defendant also gave oral evidence and confirm that the content of his sworn statement filed 28^th April 2021 which admitted as evidence in the trial. In that sworn statement the Second Defendant Commissioner of Lands Mr Allan McNeil at page 3 of his sworn statement paragraph 10 said" There is no evidence on the Ministry files of a Notice of Re-entry being prepared or sent. The purported Notice of Re-entry dated 15^th October 2014 in which Sade referred to in her sworn statement dated 25^th February 2020 should not be relied upon. According to Notice of Re-entry, it was purportedly said to be posted on 16^th October 2014 but the registered mail recept Wendy Sade relied upon is dated 28^th March 2014. This is the registered mail receipt of the Notice before Forfeiture referred to earlier.

At paragraph 11 Mr McNeil stated as follows "By letter dated 8^th January 2016, Wendy Sade Kawa wrote to the Commissioner of Lands referring to an offer she apparently had for Government land at Lengakiki but which continue to be used for Government purposes, and seeking Parcel number 191039-400 instead to be the alternative site for her previous offer at Lengakiki. Hand written note by Commissioner of Lands approving this alternative site was dated 21^st January 2016. This approval was not sanctioned by the Lands Board, nor was the Lands Board made aware of Sade's application. The Commissioner has no power to allocate land since 1^st December 2014 when the Land and Title (Amendment) Act 2014 commenced, at which point the Land Board took over the power to allocated land. I say that the Commissioner of Lands did not have power in 2016 to effectively switch a land allocation for a person that was given one allocation (Lot 1804/111/H at Lengakiki to another allocated to another (Lot 464/VIII/H Parcel Number 191-039-400 at Vura) as this amounts to a new land allocation.

I had consider the evidence of the Claimant and the First and Second Defendants and was of the view that evidence of the Second defendant is crucial to this dispute. His evidence clarifies the issues of contention, especially the validity of the allocation of the land. The evidence of the Second Defendant referred to above are clear and I do not need to repeat them again. His evidence, clearly confirmed no Notice of Re-entry was ever posted to the Claimant, this in my view makes the Forfeiture process in completed and invalid as well as the subsequent allocation to the First Defendant. The allocation is also void in view of the Land and Titled Act amendment which takes away the power to allocate land from the Commissioner of lands. For these reasons I give Judgment for the Claimant and grant the orders sought. Cost for Claimant to be taxed if not agreed.

THE COURT
EMMANUEL KOUHOTA
PUISNE JUDGE