Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Solomon Islands

Waikiu v Solomon Telekom Company Ltd [2014] SBHC 115; HCSI-CC 299 of 2014 (16 October 2014)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
(Faukona PJ)

CIVIL CASE NO. 299 OF 2014

BEFORE:

BASIL WAIKIU AND WILSON ROBOLIU
Claimants

AND:

SOLOMON TELEKOM COMPNAY LIMITED
First Defendants

AND:

NOXSY ATU, NICKSON ATU, MATHIAS ATU, FRED RI'IALA AND BARTON BARUI
Second Defendant

Date of Hearing: 16th October 2014
Date of Ruling: 16th October 2014

Ms L. Ramo for Claimants
Mr L. Puhimana for First and Second Defendants.

RULING

Faukona PJ: A claim in Category A was filed on 10th September 2014. Premise on the claim the Claimant filed this application on 29th September for interim restraining orders. The relief sought is an order restraining the first Defendant from paying the second Defendant any premium and land rentals in respect of the mobile tower constructed on part of aobere customary land until the substantive action is heard.

2. In the interim the question of ownership of the customary land had been referred to the appropriate Chiefs Council. See Exh. WR5, a letter by Counsel for the Claimant referring the dispute to Baegu House of Chiefs.

3. The question whether Baegu House of Chiefs has jurisdiction to hear land situated with in Fataleka area is yet to be sorted out, that may probably come later. The fact of the matter is that the case has been referred to the Chiefs.

4. Mr. Puhimana submits that restraining the first Defendant is not necessary. There had been an understanding that the first Defendant will not pay any premium or rentals to the second Defendant until the issue of boundary and landownership are sorted out in the rightful forum.

5. It is appreciative of what the first Defendant had done and put in place. It really assisted the Court. The arrangement brokered which probably had been agreed upon, in fact is parallel to the orders sought in the relief. This gives relief to the Claimant without going through any hash of litigation. Therefore I think the idea materialised by the Defendants be guided by order of Court for legal reasons. I therefore grant the orders sought.

Orders:
1. Order restraining the First Defendant from paying to the second Defendant any premium or land rentals in respect of the mobile tower on aobere customary land until the outcome of the substantive action.

2. The second Defendant to file defence by 30th October 2014.

3. Cost be in the cause.

4. Case adjourn to 6th November 2014, 9:30 for mention.

The Court.