PacLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Court of Appeal of Solomon Islands

You are here:  PacLII >> Databases >> Court of Appeal of Solomon Islands >> 2009 >> [2009] SBCA 6

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Decisions | Noteup | LawCite | Download | Help

Williams v Honi [2009] SBCA 6; CA-CAC 33 of 2008 (26 March 2009)

IN THE SOLOMON ISLANDS COURT OF APPEAL


Nature of Jurisdiction:
Appeal from Judgment of the High Court of Solomon Islands (Mwanesalua J)
Court File Number:
Civil Appeal No 33 of 2008 (On Appeal from High Court Civil Case No 176 of 2004)
Date of Hearing:
26 March 2009
Date of Judgment:
26 March 2009
The Court:
Palmer Vice President
Williams JA
Hansen JA
Parties:
Leonard Williams
Appellant

-v-

Clement Honi
Respondent
Advocates:

Appellants:
Respondent:

C Ashley
P Lavery
Key Words:

Ex-tempore / reserved:
Ex-tempore
Allowed / Dismissed:
Dismissed
Pages:
1 - 3

EX TEMPORE DECISION


HANSEN JA: The respondent issued proceedings against the plaintiff in May of 2004.


On the 22nd of June 2007 His Lordship Justice Brown entered judgment against the appellant in the sum of $86,100 together with interest of $13,492.93. Costs were awarded to the plaintiff to be taxed if not agreed.


No part of the judgment has been paid. The respondent took appropriate steps under the rules to enforce judgment. He obtained an enforcement order for seizure and sale of the appellants land and any chattels located thereon.


On the 7th of November 2008 the appellant filed an interlocutory order seeking a stay and an installment order of $10,000 per month. This was refused by his Lordship Justice Faukona on the 11th of December 2008. On the 17th of December 2008 the appellants sought leave to appeal. This was refused by a single judge on the 5th of March 2009. On the 19th of March the appellant gave notice to renew his application to the full Court.


A perusal of the file demonstrates that the appellants’ submission that there was no application for enforcement is wrong. It was made by Mr Lavery in accordance with Rule 21.29 on the 13th of October 2008. The Registrar made the order in Form 26 of the Rules. Rules 21.30 require that unless the Court orders otherwise, the application must be dealt with without a hearing and in the absence of the parties.


In any event, the application for a stay is without merit. Nearly two years have gone pass since judgment and nothing has been paid by the appellant. He offers installments of $10,000 per month but his own evidence shows a net income of only $4,480 per month. Any payment by installments is a matter for the appellant to take up direct with the respondent.


Leave to appeal is refused with costs to the respondent.


Sir Albert R. Palmer
Chief Justice


Vice-President of the Court of Appeal


Williams JA
Member of the Court of Appeal


Hansen JA
Member of the Court of Appeal


PacLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/sb/cases/SBCA/2009/6.html