In the High Court of Kiribati
Civil Jurisdiction
Held at Betio
Republic of Kiribati

High Court Civil Appeal 24 of 2004

Between:

Ieremia Taun
Appellant

And:

TSKL
Respondent

For the Appellant: Ms Jennifer Troup
For the Respondent: Mr Tebweao Katarake

Date of Hearing: 4 March 2005

JUDGMENT
(Ex Tempore)

TSKL borrowed a piece of equipment from Works and Energy. It was a ground driller which I take to be quite a large machine. In February 2004 TSKL used it at Bonriki for a short time before it broke down. Those in charge asked the appellant if they could leave it in his front yard. He agreed, believing it would be there for a few days. In fact it was there, in spite of his complaints for nearly two months. The appellant sued for $936.00 damages but the Single Magistrate dismissed the claim on the ground that as the appellant was not employed by the respondent to look after the equipment he was not entitled to claim for doing so.

That was not the basis on which the claim should rest. As Ms Troup has set out in her written submissions this was a trespass on the appellant’s land and he should have damages for it. But how much? The $936 claimed is based on a daily rate of $9.50 from the time the machine was left there. As the appellant had not asked initially for payment the respondent could leave it on the appellant’s land and with the appellant’s permission at no cost for a reasonable time. After a reasonable time it became a trespass for which the appellant is entitled to damages. No evidence was before the court to support the claim for $9.50 per day. It seems to me to be much too high but the plaintiff is entitled to something more than nominal damages. All I can do is to fix a global figure. I assess damages at $350.

The appeal is allowed: the judgment of the Single Magistrate set aside. Instead there will be judgment for the appellant for $350. On Ms Troup’s application I award in addition $10 costs.

THE HON ROBIN MILLHOUSE QC
Chief Justice