Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Niue

  Download original PDF

Kaulima v Gill - Section 1, Block II, Part Lialagi, Alofi [2014] NUHC 9; Application 1098/57/6 (8 January 2014)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NIUE

(LAND DIVISION)

App No. 10984/57/6

On 7 January 2014 I was emailed a copy of an application for an injunction filed
by Lamepati Hunuki Kaulima, Leo Hunuki and Lawes Hunuki.

[2] The application is to stop any building works and future proposed building on the

land upon the grounds that Mamataheone Hunuki Gill's appointment as the Leveki for this land was unauthorised by the family and the building work on the land is

unauthorised and without prior consultation with the family.

[3] James Gill has responded on behalf Mamatahoene Gill stating that Mamatahoene

Gill was duly appointed as Leveki by Court Order of 3 September 2007, that

Mamatahoene Gill was granted an Occupation Order by the Court on 24 November 2010

and that over the last 10 years considerable time and expense has been spent renovating and maintaining the property without contribution or objection from family members. It is also stated that the applicants of the injunction have not resided in Niue for more than twenty years and have shown little interest in the Magafaoa. Mamatahoene Gill has been

closely and actively involved in the previous and current Leveki of the Hunuki Magafaoa.

Discussion

[4] Having considered the application and the supporting documentation I do not
consider the application has merit and should fail.

[5] First, Mamatahoene Gill was duly appointed Leveki by the Court on 3 September
2007. There have been no applications for rehearing or appeal of that decision within thestatutory timeframes.

[6] Accordingly Mamatahoene Gill has the authority to act as Leveki for the Magafaoa and make decisions for this land.

[7] Next, by Court Order of 24 November 2010 Mamatahoene Gill was granted an Occupation Order in respect of this land. Again there have been no applications for rehearing or appeal of that decision. Accordingly Mamatahoene Gill and James Gill have

the authority to carry out the works on this land.

[8] In my view therefore there is no serious case to answer by the applicants and the applications for the injunction must be dismissed.

[9] A copy of this decision is to go to all parties.

Dated at Wellington this

8^th January 2014

WW Isaac

JUDGE