Oraioha v Haura Development Association [2024] SBHC 86; HCSI-CC 470 of 2023 (23 August 2024)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Case name:	Oraioha v Haura Development Association
Citation:
Date of decision:	23 August 2024
Parties:	Teston Oraioha and Terence Huoi v Haura Development Associate, King Solomon Development Limited
Date of hearing:	20 August 2024
Court file number(s):	470 of 2023
Jurisdiction:	Civil
Place of delivery:
Judge(s):	Lawry; PJ
On appeal from:
Order:	1. Judgment is entered against the Claimants in favour of the First and Second Defendants. 2. The Claimants are to pay the costs of the First and Second Defendant on an indemnity basis in respect of the trial and on the standard basis for all matters leading up to the trial. If those costs are not agreed they are to be assessed.
Representation:	No Appearance for the Claimant Mr L Puhimana for the First and Second Defendant
Catchwords:
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Environment Act 1998
Cases cited:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CIVIL JURISDICTION

Civil Case No. 470 of 2023

BETWEEN

TESTON ORAIOHA AND TERENCE HUOI
Claimant

AND:

HAURA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION
First Defendant

AND:

KING SOLOMON DEVELOPMENT LIMITED
Second Defendant

Date of Hearing: 20 August 2024
Date of Ruling: 23 August 2024

No Appearance for the Claimant
Mr L Puhimana for the First and Second Defendant

Judgment

1. The Claimants represent the villagers from the Tetere Community, Makira Harbour, Haununu District in Makira Ulawa Province.
2. The First Defendant is the holder of felling licence A10254. The Second Defendant has been contracted by the First Defendant to undertake the logging operations permitted by the licence.
3. The Claimants have sought an order that the First and Second Defendants have breached the terms of the felling licence which they say has caused environmental damage to the land used by the villagers and has caused contamination of their water supplies.
4. The Claimants further allege that the Defendants failed to obtain development consent pursuant to the provisions of the Environment Act 1998. Those allegations are denied by the First and Second Defendants who have produced a sworn statement of Jerry Morea filed on 23 February 2024. That sworn statement has annexed to it the felling licence A10254, the Annual Harvesting Plan Approval, the termination of the Technology Agreement between the First and Second Defendants dated 1 April 2023, the confirmation of completion of the operation provided by the Ministry of Forestry and Research dated 18 September 2023 and documentation from the Second Defendant, the land owners of the blocks in the concession, the Provincial Government concerning the performance bond. Mr Morea deposes that the operation was cut short by mutual agreement following disputes among the land owning groups, such disputes did not relate to allegations of environmental damage.
5. For the Claimants there is a joint sworn statement from the two Claimants. They have annexed to their sworn statement evidence of authorisation to bring the proceedings, a copy of the Technology Agreement between the First Defendant and the Second Defendant and a report they commissioned entitled Damage and Valuation Assessment.
6. At paragraph 6 of the joint sworn statement the Claimants allege that the requirements of the Revised Solomon Islands Code of Logging Practice, May 2002 were not followed. As a result they say that they made complaints to the Second Defendant.
7. The Claimants served the claim on the Second Defendants on 28 September 2023. There is no evidence of having served the First Defendant. On 2 November 2023 the First Defendant filed a defence to the claim. The Claimants filed an application for judgment by default however on 10 November 2023 the Court indicated to counsel that the nature of the claim was such that the Court considered that evidence would be required and the matter should proceed to trial.
8. On 24 November 2024 the Court made direction orders. Both the Claimants and the First and Second Defendants were represented at that ‘mention’ hearing. The directions recorded the following orders:
   1. The Claimants to file and serve any reply to the defence by 15 December 2023.
   2. Any further sworn statement from the Claimants is to be filed by 31 December 2023. Any sworn statement for the Defendants is to be filed by 31 January 2024.
   3. The sworn statements of lists of documents is to be filed by 9 February 2024.
   4. The parties are to complete the discovery process by 29 February 2024.
   5. The matter is listed for mention on 7 March 2024.
9. In the perfected order signed on 30 November 2023 the dates for filing and serving any further sworn statements was recorded as being 31 January 2024.
10. The only sworn statements filed since 24 November 2023 was the statement of Jerry Morea, previously referred to and a further sworn statement by him concerning the Defendants’ list of documents.
11. At the mention hearing on 7 March 2024 counsel for the Claimants sought a further mention on 14 March 2024 and indicated that an application on a preliminary issue would be filed.
12. The Claimants filed the application on 20 March 2024. On 28 March 2024 the Court directed written submissions to be filed and served by 25 April 2024. The parties agreed that the Court would determine the application on the basis of those submissions. The Defendant had filed their sworn statement of List of Documents on 28 March 2024. Time was extended for the Claimants to file their sworn statement of their list of documents and to complete the discovery process by 2 May 2024.
13. By 2 May 2024 the Claimant had not filed any submissions in support of the application to determine the preliminary issue. The Court extended time for those submissions to be filed to close of business on 13 May 2024. The Court directed that the case be called for mention on 16 May 2024 for the Court to make a ruling on the issue or alternatively set a date to hear further from Counsel.
14. By 16 May 2024 no submissions were filed by Counsel. The Claimants had not filed any sworn statement of their list of documents. Accordingly on 16 May 2024 a pre-trial conference date was set for 11 June 2024. Agreed facts and issues were to be filed by 3 June 2024. Counsel for the Claimants prepared the order which was perfected on 23 May 2024.
15. On 11 June 2024 at the pre-trial conference the date for trial was set for 20 August 2024. Counsel for the Claimants did not appear and had not complied with the previous Court orders. The Court ordered that the agreed facts and issues that still had not been filed as ordered, were to be filed by 25 June 2024. The agreed bundle of documents index and the Court books were to be filed by 31 July 2024. The parties were to file and serve notices for cross examination by 4 August 2024.
16. The Claimants have not filed any sworn statement of their list of documents, have not filed any agreed facts nor index nor Court book. They have not required any cross examination of any defence witness. They have not provided any further sworn statement in support of the claim other than the joint sworn statement filed with the claim.
17. On 20 August 2024 there was no appearance by or on behalf of the Claimants at the trial. Counsel for the Defendants provided evidence that the directions made on 11 June 2024 were served on the Claimants counsel on 18 June 2024.
18. The Defendants filed an application on 20 August 2024 in reliance on rule 12.25. That rule provides as follows:
    • “12.25 If a claimant does not attend when the trial starts:
    • (a) the court may adjourn the proceeding to another date; or
    • (b) the court may dismiss the claimant’s claim and give judgment for the defendant; or
    • (c) the defendant, with leave of the court, may call evidence to establish that the defendant is entitled to judgment under a counterclaim against the claimant and the court may, after hearing the claimant and considering any court book and any sworn statements, give judgment, including judgment on the counterclaim, for the defendant.”
19. At the start of the trial then the First and Second Defendants were represented but there was no appearance by or on behalf of the Claimants.
20. The Court records that the Claimants have not filed further sworn statements as ordered in November 2023. They have not provided a sworn statement of their list of documents, they have not complied with the order to provide submissions in support of the application to determine the preliminary issue. They have not provided the agreed facts and issues. They have not provided an index of agreed documents. They have not provided the Court book. Significantly they have not provided any notice to cross examine the defence witness. Although a report was annexed to the joint sworn statement of the Claimants there is no evidence from the author of that report. There has been no application to vacate the trial and set a fresh date.
21. The trial then would need to proceed on the basis of the material before the Court. I am satisfied that the conduct of the Claimants in ignoring Court orders and their failure to appear at the trial satisfies me that the Court should make an order in terms of rule 12.25. I accept that as the Claimant did not attend the trial and I bear in mind the repeated failures to comply with the orders of the Court. The Claimants’ claim is therefore dismissed and judgment is entered for the First and Second Defendants.

Orders

1. Judgment is entered against the Claimants in favour of the First and Second Defendants.
   2. The Claimants are to pay the costs of the First and Second Defendant on an indemnity basis in respect of the trial and on the standard basis for all matters leading up to the trial. If those costs are not agreed they are to be assessed.

By the Court
Hon. Justice Howard Lawry
Puisne Judge