Pang v Woodland Enterprises Ltd [2024] SBHC 72; HCSI-CC 428 of 2023 (4 July 2024)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Case name:	Pang v Woodland Enterprises Ltd
Citation:
Date of decision:	4 July 2024
Parties:	Steven Ngu Gie Pang v Woodland Enterprises Limited
Date of hearing:	4 July 2024
Court file number(s):	428 of 2023
Jurisdiction:	Civil
Place of delivery:
Judge(s):	Aulanga PJ
On appeal from:
Order:	1. Matter is dismissed by striking out the amended claim under rule 8.19 of the Solomon Islands Courts (Civil Procedure Rules) 2007. 2. Parties to bear own costs.
Representation:	Mr. B. Kama for the Claimant Mr. A. Tahamae for the Defendant
Catchwords:
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Solomon Islands Courts (Civil Procedure) Rule 2007 r 1.8 and 1.19
Cases cited:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CIVIL JURISDICTION

Civil Case No. 428 of 2023

BETWEEN

STEVEN NGU GIE PANG
Claimant

AND:

WOODLAND ENTERPRISES LIMITED
Defendant

Date of Hearing: 4 July 2024
Date of Ruling: 4 July 2024

Mr. B. Kama for the Claimant
Mr. A. Tahamae for the Defendant

RULING

AULANGA PJ

1. A case listed for trial supposed to be heard and expedited as and when it is listed. This is to ensure that the Court is to make a decision on the matter within a reasonable time. There is also a common saying or maxim in law that when the case is delayed, it also delays justice. This in turns, denied justice to the case itself and the parties to the case.
2. After the closure of pleadings, this matter was listed for trial on 7^th May 2024 at 9:30am. On the trial date, the matter did not proceed and was vacated. That was due to the parties unable to complete the filing of these documents: sworn statements for trial, agreed facts and issues for trial, index to court book, court book and notice to cross-examine witness. The Court then vacated the trial and set a new trial date. This is the second trial date for the matter. The Court then granted extension of time for parties to complete the filing of the trial documents as follows:
   1. Parties to file sworn statements for trial by 20^th May 2024.
   2. Agreed facts and issues to be filed by 3^rd June 2024.
   3. Index to court book to be filed by 10^th June 2024.
   4. Court book to be filed by 17^th June 2024.
   5. Notice to cross-examine to be filed by 24^th June 2024.
   6. Trial is relisted to 4^th July 2024 at 1:30pm.
3. When the matter returned for trial on 4^th July 2024, counsel for the Claimant, Mr. Brennan Kama, did not appear. Only counsel for the Defendant appeared in Court.
4. In fact, the Court had received an email from counsel for the Claimant, requesting a further vacating of the trial date for reasons that directions 2 to 5 above were yet to be complied with by both counsels. Another reason was due to Claimant’s counsel has suffered illness that resulted in the noncompliance of the directions. That warrants another new trial date, which by calculation, it should be the third trial date to be set for the matter.

Court’s decision

5. For the ground that counsels have failed to comply with filing of the documents required in directions 2 to 5 above, I refused to accept that. The reasons offered by the Claimant in the email is unsatisfactory. The proper way is to appear in Court and make the application other than sending an email. This is the second time round the Court has generously given the parties trial dates and to file the documents for the trial. This is too much ample time afforded or given to the parties that could be properly or better utilised. All I can see is that there is an obvious manifestation of laxity or the lack of diligence to progress the case seriously on the part of the parties. The conduct of the parties has breached rules 1.8 and 8.19 of the Solomon Islands Courts (Civil Procedure Rules) 2007 which should not be tolerated.
6. On the ground of illness, I can see that the Claimant’s counsel was sick and was given time for rest from 12^th June to 18^th June 2024. If that is so, directions 2 and 3 should have been complied with and directions 4 can be complied with by filing of the court book after the due date with explanations to be given to the Court at the trial date. The rest of the directions can be complied with and follow suit.
7. In practice, if some of the documents have been filed late, the Court can still accept the late filing of the documents if a genuine reason like illness of a counsel is offered to the Court and if the interest of justice requires. From 12^th June to 18^th June 2024 as the sick leave period, only the direction to file the court book was required to be complied with during that period. The parties should not use the Claimant’s illness for that period as a basis for not filing anything at all as required in the direction. Because of those reasons, I also refused to accept the ground of illness to vacate the trial for the second time round. The period the Claimant was sick only affected the compliance with direction 4. I do not see why directions 2, 3 and the others have not been complied with.
8. Another thing is, the Claimant did not attend to the Court when the matter was called for the trial. This is another serious default. Why that was so is unknown. The Claimant counsel should attend to Court in person and seek vacation or relisting of the trial date. Requesting vacation of the trial date through email and then not attending to Court to give the explanations for the abandonment of the trial for the second time round is unknown and is not provided for in the rules. In fact, it is a serious unethical conduct by counsel.
9. Based on those grounds, I dismiss this proceeding by striking out the amended claim under rule 8.19 of the Solomon Islands Courts (Civil Procedure Rules) 2007.

Orders of the Court

1. Matter is dismissed by striking out the amended claim under rule 8.19 of the Solomon Islands Courts (Civil Procedure Rules) 2007.
2. Parties to bear own costs.

THE COURT
Augustine S. Aulanga
PUISNE JUDGE