HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Case name: 	Vailima v Leong 	
		
Citation:		
		
Date of decision: 	8 November 2024	
		
Parties: 	George Vailima, Julia Natei, Dora Viino, Alfred Billy, Obry Talasasa, Elibeth Sade, Niloria Tova And Jonas v Kevin Leong	
		
Date of hearing: 	8 November 2024	
		
Court file number(s): 	454 of 2024	
		
Jurisdiction: 	Civil 	
		
Place of delivery: 		
		
Judge(s): 	Lawry; PJ	
		
On appeal from:		
		
Order:	1. The proceedings in CCN 454 of 2024 have been withdrawn.
2. The Sheriff is authorised to continue effecting the orders that were suspended until 7 November 2024.	
		
Representation: 	Mr F Samani for the Claimants
No Appearance for the Defendant 	
		
Catchwords: 		
		
Words and phrases:		
		
Legislation cited:		
		
Cases cited:		

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CIVIL JURISDICTION

Civil Case No. 454 of 2024

BETWEEN

GEORGE VAILIMA, JULIA NATEI, DORA VIINO, ALFRED BILLY, OBRY TALASASA, ELIBETH SADE, NILORIA TOVA and JONAS
Claimants

AND:

KEVIN LEONG
Defendant 

Date of Hearing: 8 November 2024
Date of Decision: 8 November 2024

Counsel:
Mr F Samani for the Claimants 
No Appearance for the Defendant 

Lawry; PJ
RULING 
1. 	On 7 November 2024 of the claimants filed a claim, seeking an order for the Commissioner of Lands to demarcate, subdivide and allocate part of the fixed term estate in parcel number 191–0 23–152 to the claimants.
2. 	The claimants in spite of changes to how their names are spelt, are defendants in civil case number 198 of 2019. In this ruling I have followed the spelling of the names as filed in the pleadings including the apparent omission of letters for some of the persons and the omission of a surname for the last named claimant. In CCN 198 of 2019, consent orders were made in November 2023. As recently as 15 October 2024 the defendants in that case had brought an application to set aside a consent order made in November 2023 and to suspend the enforcement of that order.
3. 	When that application was heard on 24 October 2024, counsel for the defendants and counsel for the claimant, reached an agreement. The defendants agreed to withdraw their application to set aside the order, and to suspend the enforcement order, and in return of the claimant agreed to an order that the sheriff not proceed with the enforcement order for a further 14 days. As a result, the Court directed the sheriff to not proceed with enforcement immediately, but that he may resume on 7 November 2024. 
4. 	The application brought today in civil case for 454 of 2024, has not been served on the defendant nor his counsel in civil case number 198 of 2019. At the hearing, the Court advised counsel that the Court would not make further orders unless the Defendant had the opportunity to be heard. The Court also pointed out that the sworn statement filed by Julia Natei is inconsistent with material on record in civil case 198 of 2019.
5. 	Counsel for the claimants, then withdrew the application and the proceedings, but asked that a further 14 days be allowed for the claimants to vacate the premises.  As the defendant had not been served with the application, I was not prepared to grant a further 14 days. At the request of counsel the Court however agreed that a message would be passed on to the sheriff to not proceed today in order to allow any occupants to move out of the premises.
6. 	Following the hearing I was advised by my Associate that the sheriff was sent an email concerning the request from the Court. However he was not in the office. It turned out that he was a effecting the order that had previously been made. In those circumstances, what was merely a request to delay further eviction until Monday must be put a side. There is no current application before the Court on either set of proceedings. That is because the proceedings in the civil case of 454 of 2024 were withdrawn, and on any view of the matter, must be regarded as an abuse of process given the orders made in CCN 198 of 2019.
7. 	Accordingly, the sheriff is permitted to continue the eviction of the defendants in CCN 198 of 2019. The Court has made no order to the contrary in CCN 454 of 2024. The Court acknowledges that a request would be made to not proceed until Monday 11 November 2024, however, the indication of that request was made without the knowledge that the sheriff was already engaged in the eviction process. Since the Court adjourned, I have learned from the sheriff that only one place remains to be dealt with. That was an important matter that counsel should have brought to my attention. He did not do so.
8. 	For the avoidance of doubt, the sheriff may proceed without further delay in carrying out the orders that were suspended until 7 November 2024.
Orders
1.	The proceedings in CCN 454 of 2024 have been withdrawn.
2.	The Sheriff is authorised to continue effecting the orders that were suspended until 7 November 2024.
By the Court
Hon. Justice Howard Lawry
Puisne Judge