Winner Properties Ltd v Attorney General [2024] SBHC 83; HCSI-CC 221 of 2018 (20 August 2024)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Case name:	Winner Properties Ltd v The Attorney General
Citation:
Date of decision:	20 August 2024
Parties:	Winner Properties Limited v The Attorney General, The Attorney General, Vuvula Poultry Limited
Date of hearing:
Court file number(s):	221 of 2018
Jurisdiction:	Civil
Place of delivery:
Judge(s):	Aulanga PJ
On appeal from:
Order:	(1) Dismiss this proceeding by the Court’s own motion for an abuse of the Court’s process under rule 9.75 (c) of the Solomon Islands Courts (Civil Procedure) Rules 2007. (2) Parties shall bear own costs.
Representation:	Mr. J. Iniga for the Claimant Mr. J. Devesi for the First and Second Defendant Mr. A. Radclyffe for the Third Defendant
Catchwords:
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Solomon Islands Courts (Civil Procedure) Rule 2007, r 9.75 (c)
Cases cited:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CIVIL JURISDICTION

Civil Case No. 221 of 2018

BETWEEN

WINER PROPERTIES LIMITED
Claimant

AND:

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
(In respect of the Commissioner of Lands)
First Defendant

AND:

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
(In respect of the Registrar of Titles)
Second Defendant

AND:

VUVULA POULTRY LIMITED
Third Defendant

Date of Ruling: 20 August 2024 (In Chambers)

Mr. J. Iniga for the Claimant
Mr. J. Devesi for the First and Second Defendants
Mr. A. Radclyffe for the Third Defendant

RULING

AULANGA PJ

1. On 12^th August 2024, I mentioned the matter. Court heard from counsels for the Defendants that the matter was already a completed case. Claimant’s counsel said the converse. I adjourned the case with a direction for the Court to advise the parties on whether or not to relist the matter upon confirmation of the status of the proceeding.
2. This matter came before Deputy Chief Justice on 24^th October 2019 and was adjourned generally for proper review and perusal of the file in light of the information provided to the Court by counsels that this proceeding could be a duplication of another completed High Court proceeding.
3. I have noted this proceeding is for setting aside of forfeiture notices and for rectification of titles for these two parcels of land FTE No. 191-037-40 and FTE No. 191-037-41.
4. Upon proper file search, the parties to this proceeding had already litigated these two parcels of land in HCSI CC 351 of 2013 and judgment following trial was delivered on 16^th March 2017. In that HCSI CC 351 of 2013 case, the Court dismissed Winner Property Limited’s claim and found in favour of Vuvula Poultry Limited by making awards for Vuvula to have possession of those two parcels of land. An appeal was filed to the Court of Appeal against that decision but was discontinued or abandoned on 4^th May 2018.
5. Now the losing party (Winner Properties Ltd) again relitigated the matter by filing of this claim that already been conclusively adjudicated in another High Court proceeding (HCSI CC 351 of 2013).
6. This is an abuse of the Court’s process under rule 9.75 (c) of the Solomon Islands Courts (Civil Procedure) Rules 2007. I am conscious of the trite legal principle of natural justice that requires the parties to this matter to be given the opportunity to make submissions before a decision can be made. However, that rule also gives the discretion for the Court to dismiss the proceeding on its own motion as part of getting rid of unmeritorious cases from the Court’s system. This discretion can be exercised in a clear or straight forward case where the facts of the case are overwhelmingly clear to warrant an instant dismissal of the matter without the need to hear from the parties.
7. This is one of those clear cases that the facts and circumstances of it clearly warrant me to exercise such discretion. I exercise it cautiously and with great care given the straightforwardness of this proceeding. This proceeding in my view is a clear re-litigation of HCSI CC 351 of 2013. As alluded to earlier, HCSI CC 351 of 2013 was already completed following the trial. Hence, if this proceeding is to be allowed, it will result in the re-litigation of the already concluded matter in HCSI CC 351 of 2013. The rights of the parties herein to those two parcels of land FTE No. 191-037-40 and FTE No. 191-037-41 have been conclusively adjudged and determined in that proceeding. The appeal against that decision was discontinued about six years ago. Therefore, it is not opened for this Court to re-open that finding by allowing the continuity of this claim before this Court. To do so is a classic example of an abuse of the Court’s process. This must not be allowed and for these reasons, this matter must be dismissed by the Court’s own motion for an abuse of the Court’s process under rule 9.75 (c) of the Solomon Islands Courts (Civil Procedure) Rules 2007. Parties shall bear own costs.

Orders of the Court

(1) Dismiss this proceeding by the Court’s own motion for an abuse of the Court’s process under rule 9.75 (c) of the Solomon Islands Courts (Civil Procedure) Rules 2007.
(2) Parties shall bear own costs.

Augustine S. Aulanga
PUISNE JUDGE