Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Court of Appeal of Fiji

Mototabua v State [2012] FJCA 76; AAU0059.2010 (31 October 2012)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL, FIJI
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI

Criminal Appeal No: AAU0059 of 2010
(on appeal from HAA151/10)

BEFORE THE JUSTICE OF APPEAL, HON. JUSTICE PAUL K. MADIGAN

BETWEEN:

ELIKI MOTOTABUA
Applicant

AND:

THE STATE
Respondent

Counsel : Applicant in person
Ms J. Cokanasiga for the State

Date of Hearing : 25 October 2012
Date of Judgment : 31 October 2012

JUDGMENT

1. The applicant applies for leave to appeal the termination by the Chief Registrar of his attempts to have proceedings against him in the Magistrates' Court permanently stayed.

2. The applicant was originally charged in the Nausori Magistrates' Court on the 4th February 2003 with two counts of possession of illicit drugs to which he pleaded not guilty. That matter has never been determined for the very reason that the applicant has made multiple applications for stay in that Magistrates' Court and in the High Court and has made multiple appeals consequent to refusal of those applications to the Court of Appeal and to the Supreme Court.

3. The certificate of termination of proceedings issued on the 3rd August 2010 did not give reasons (nor should it) – but that is now the subject of the latest appeal by this applicant. He states that the evidence "in issue" should have been "legally discussed" and he submits before me that denial of his cause is a breach of his human rights.

4. This applicant appears to be addicted to litigation to the extent that his appeals have now become vexatious. That in itself would be grounds to dismiss this appeal however it is a matter of law as stipulated by section 2 of the Administration of Justice (Amendment) (No. 2) Decree 2009 that such a certificate issued by the then acting Chief Registrar is "not subject to challenge in any court or in any tribunal."

5. This application for leave fails therefore on two grounds: first that it is vexatious and should be dismissed under s.35(2) of the Court of Appeal Act and secondly that no appeal can lie as a matter of law to a termination certificate issued by the Registrar pursuant to section 5(5) of the Administration of Justice (Amendment) Decree No. 2 of 2009.

6. The applicant is refused leave to appeal and his appeal is dismissed pursuant to section 35(2) of the Court of Appeal Act.

Paul K. Madigan
Judge of Appeal

At Suva
31 October 2012