IN THE HIGH COURT OF KIRIBATI
(BEFORE THE HON R LUSSICK C.J.)

HCLA 63/97

BETWEEN:

KIEBU KATAUNATI
Appellant

AND:

MAMAO TIROBA
Respondent

Appellant in person
Mr D Lambourne for the Respondent

Date of Hearing: 19 March 1999

JUDGMENT

This is an appeal against the decision of the South Tarawa Magistrates' Court (Lands) delivered on 1 July 1997 in case no. 225/97. The Single Magistrate hearing the case made an order evicting the appellant from the land Teere 789o, effective 3 months from that day.

That decision is now appealed on the following grounds:

"We have lived on this land since 1979 therefore we want compensation for developments we have done on this land".

The evidence before the Single Magistrate was that the appellant and her family were permitted to live on the land by the previous owner, N. Kaobunang. Such permission was by way of licence only, and there was no lease agreement. Subsequently, the land was registered in the name of the present respondent, who has never acknowledged that the appellant has any right to stay on the land.

The appellant does not dispute the respondent's title, nor has she established that she has any interest in the land. In fact, the appellant does not claim that the case in the lower court was wrongly decided. She simply argues that if she is to be made to leave the subject land then she ought to be paid compensation.

The appellant has not established any right to compensation, but if she thinks that she can produce sufficient evidence to do so, then that is a matter which can be litigated in a magistrates' court upon the making of the appropriate application. It has no bearing on the present issue. There was evidence in the lower court that the appellant had erected some local houses which are capable of being removed. Counsel for the respondent tells us that there is no objection to the appellant removing these houses within 3 months, should the appeal be dismissed.

We do not think that the Single Magistrate made any error, whether in law or in fact, when he decided that the appellant's permission to stay on the land came to an end when the person who granted the permission ceased to be the owner. The appeal is therefore dismissed. The appellant is ordered to vacate the subject land on or before 26 June 1999.

The appellant is advised that she has a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal within 6 weeks.

THE HON R B LUSSICK
Chief Justice
(26/03/99)

TEKAIE TENANORA
Magistrate
(26/03/99)

BETERO KAITANGARE
Magistrate
(26/03/99)