Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Local Court of Solomon Islands |
IN THE MALAITA LOCAL COURT
Civil Jurisdiction
Receipt No. B 1428685
CIVIL- CUSTOMARY LAND — CASE NO. 6 of 2012
BETWEEN:
(1) SAMO MASIABU
(representing AIBOU land)
(2) JIMSON SIOFA
(representing NAONI/FELEKE tribe)
Plaintiffs
AND:
(1) CHRIS MONA & (2) DICK SUIBOO
(representing FUNILOFO & FELENI tribe)
Defendants
LAND IN DISPUTE: AIBOU PARCEL OF LAND
Date of Hearing: 29-30 July, 2014
Date of Ruling: 1ST August, 2014.
RULLING
[1.0] Introduction.
This is the ruling to the preliminary enquiry into the unaccepted settlement made on the 18/7/2011 at Bethany village by the Tatalelanasina House of Chiefs of East Kwaio. The Aibou parcel of land settlement is forwarded for the local Court for registration on 24/5/12 and is known as civil case no . 6 of 2012.
[2.0] Basis For Inquiry (the Issue before court).
The very issue before the court is to determine whether the Aibou parcel of land "UNACEPTED SETTLEMENT" of 18th July, 2011 be upheld by the local court or be remitted to the chiefs for rehearing.
[3.0] Party Claims
(3.1) Plaintiffs Claim
The plaintiffs claim that the Unaccepted Settlement made on 18th July 2011 on Aibou Parcel of Land is properly done by the Tataelanasina House of Chiefs and the Local Court should uphold it as legal basis for the Local Court to proceed on with the hearing.
They further claim that the defendants failed to attend the chiefs hearing on 16th May, 2011 and again on 4th July, 2011. Then on 6th July, 2011 the defendants did attend but they failed to give their statement of claim before the chiefs.
In support of their claim, the plaintiffs submitted previous native court records and letters annexed as Refs 1 to 11 (attached to their submission — Plaintiffs Submission Exhibit 1)
They argued that the defendants failed to follow the proper channels for resolving the dispute under law and instead resort to other custom means to block the progress of the case which results in the President of the Tataelanasina House of Chiefs fleeing to West Kwaio leaving his home and family. On another incident, they claim their community school has closed down due to demands from the defendants.
(3.2) The defense
The defendants, on the other hand, assert that on 6th July, 2011 their party (Funilofo group) did not attend the chiefs hearing for the reason that they have to attend a custom cleansing ritual that has to be performed by their Custom Priest. They further assert that their reason for not attending the scheduled hearing is accepted by the President of the Tataelanasina House of Chiefs.
The defendant further claims that on 7th July, 2011 the President of the chiefs deferred the hearing of the case to a later date.
In defense of the claims by the plaintiffs, the defendants argue that previous Native Court cases submitted by the plaintiffs' as Ref 1-3 are not related to the current issue over Aibou Portion of Land. Furthermore, they argue that the plaintiffs Refs 4 -11 lacks substantial evidence relevant to the current issue (the Unaccepted Settlement of 18th July, 2011).
They further argue that the Unaccepted Settlement form is not signed by the Tataelanasina House of Chiefs.
On the basis of their arguments the defendants maintain that the case be referred to the chiefs for proper settlement in custom.
[4.0] Findings of Court
[5.0] Confirmation
The Court confirms that the Aibou customary land dispute settlement is not done properly in accordance with the statutory requirements of Sections 12(1)(a)(b) and (c) of the Local Court Act, Cap [19].
This court, therefore cannot continue further with its proceedings but rules as follows:
RULING
Further orders by court:
THE COURT
President | |
2. Eddie Wasi | Court Justice |
3. Alphose Wasi | Court Justice |
4. Hillary D Fioru | LC Clerk |
Dated this 1st day of August, 2014
PacLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/sb/cases/SBLC/2014/11.html