Pan Oceanic Bank Ltd v AJF Enterprises Ltd [2024] SBHC 18; HCSI-CC 10 of 2018 (27 February 2024)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Case name:	Pan Oceanic Bank Ltd v AJF Enterprises Ltd
Citation:
Date of decision:	27 February 2024
Parties:	Pan Oceanic Bank Limited v AJF Enterprises Limited
Date of hearing:	21 February 2024
Court file number(s):	10 of 2018
Jurisdiction:	Civil
Place of delivery:
Judge(s):	Kouhota; PJ
On appeal from:
Order:	In view of this, the Court grant the Claimants application and the orders sought.
Representation:	Fakarii C for the Claimant/Applicant No appearance for the Defendant/ Respondent
Catchwords:
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:
Cases cited:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CIVIL JURISDICTION

Civil Case No. 10 of 2018

BETWEEN

PAN OCEANIC BANK LIMITED
Claimant

AND:

AJF ENTERPRISES LIMITED
Defendant

Date for Hearing: 21 February 2024
Date of Ruling: 27 February 2024

Fakarii C for the Claimant/Applicant
No Appearance for the Respondent

RULING ON APPLICATION TO SELL PROPERTY

KOUHOTA J

The Claimant on 5^th October 2018 filed a category (A) against the Defendant seeking the following orders;

1. For payment of a sum of $1,997,576.97 and interest at the Claimant’s prevailing rate from 10^th September 2018.
2. An order for sale of perpetual Estate in parcel No. 191-048-04
3. An order for sale over vehicle registration number MA 2471

I understand that the sum claimed by the Claimant is a loan and overdrafts they gave to the Defendant and the perpetual estate the Claimant is applying to sell what was provided and charge against the loan or to secure the loan. It is obvious that the Claimant filed this claim because the Defendant had defaulted on the payment of the loan and the overdrafts.

On 6^th Mrach 2019, the Court entered a default judgment against the Defendant on the amended application for default judgment filed on 7^th of February 2019.

Following the default judgment the Claimant is now applying for leave to sell Perpetual Estate in Parcel number 191-048-04, upper Kakabona to Hon. Bradley Tovusia. The property was charged against the loan the Defendant obtained from the Claimant. The application was served on the Defendant as confirmed by Michael Haomae in his sworn statement filed on 21^st February 2021 as prove of service.

At the hearing of this application the Defendant did not turn up but his letter objecting the application for leave to sell the property was send to the Solicitor for the Claimant Mr Fakari. A copy of the letter was given to the Court by Mr Fakari. The Defendant’s reasons for his objection were stated in the letter as follows;

1. The property was a perpetual Estate and tribal land.
2. The land has a water source which supplied 80% of the Kakabona community and selling it will cause a big issue for the community
3. The land area is 14.5 hectares and its value is well above the loan balance,

The Defendant also suggested option as follows;

1. There was an arrangement in place with a developer and his tribal group to develop the land into real estate but the developer is still in China.
2. Sub-divide the land for the bank to hold a portion in relation to the value of the loan balance.

For the reason and the suggestion the Defendant seek leniency. I had considered the objection and was of the view there is no merit in the objections. Defendant was aware of the consequence of putting up the property as charge against the loan. I consider that the value of the land charge against the loan is a fair amount. I take judicial notice that based on the current value of the land in the open market, the value of the land is less than the outstanding loan.

In view of this, the Court grant the Claimants application and the orders sought.

THE COURT
Justice Emmanuel Kouhota
Puisne Judge