Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Aelan Kot blong Vanuatu

  Download original PDF

Kalmet v Kalpong [2006] VUICB 6; Land Case 08 of 1993 (24 March 2006)

IN THE EFATE ISLAND COURT OF
THE REPUBLIC OF VANUATU
Held at Port Vila
(Civil Jurisdiction)

Land Case No.08 OF 1993

BETWEEN:

FAMILY KALMET
-Original Claimant

And:

FAMILY KALPONG
-Counter-Claimant No. 1

AND:

JIF KORIMAN
-Counter-Claimant No.2

AND:

FAMILY KALMERMER
-Counter Claimant No.4

AND:

FAMILY KALWATONG
-Counter Claimant No. 5

AND:

JIF KALTAPAU & DESCENDANT
-Counter-Claimant No:6

AND

FAMILY ALICK KALONIKARA
-Counter- Claimant No.7

AND:

FAMILY NASE KALMET TALEO
-Counter-Claimant No.8

AND:

FAMILY FATAN KALMARI
-Counter-Claimant No. 9

JUDGMENT

Hearing Date: 9th January 2006.
Judgment Date: 24th March 2006

Corum: Nesbeth Wilson
Magistrate

Justices: Mrs Lucy Sandy
Chief Raymond Marongoe
Chief Jimmy Meameadola

Clerk: Semi Joel

NEM BLONG LAND CLAIM: TEOUMA RENTAPAU LAND

Before kot istat blong harem kes ia, ibin kat sam issues we kot wetem olgeta patis oli dil wetem. Fas taem Magistrate iexplain posesin blong hem long olgeta patis. Hemia we hem tu ikat interest long land long saet long Land Lease. Kot hemi explain long olgeta patis se ikat two different interest long ples ia. Ikat interest long land lease we idifferent long interest long saet blong customary land ownership. Afta long explenasen ia kot iaskem ol patis sipos oli gat any objection long Magistrate or any long olgeta Justisis we oli sitaon long kes ia.

Aplication:

Counter Claimant No. 8, Karongon Kalmet wetem Counter Claimant . No.9, George Sualo tugeta iobject se Magistrate Nesbeth Wilson ino shud harem case ia forom se hemi gat interest long wan lease land inside long land we hemi stap befo long kot ia. George Sualo italem se Magistrate ishud save who ia hemi landowner long ples ia. All narafala parties oli no gat any objection long Magistrate isitaon long case ia.

Mr Thomas Tau long behav long Counter Claiman No. 4 iobject long twofala justices, hemia Justice Lucy Sandy mo Justice Raymond Marongoe se tufala ishud not sitaon long case ia forom se tufala ibin dil wetel some interlocutory applications long matta ia. Mo last wan, George Sualo hemi bin object long Justice Meameadola mo Justice Marongoe se tufala ino shud sidaon long kes ia forom se tufala ibin memba blong Vaturisu Counsel blong ol Jifs mo tufala ibin wok wetem spokesman blong Original Claimant, Jif Bakoa Kalpoilep.

Long respond long ol applications ia Jif Bakoa Kalpoilep V hemi taem se hemi no agree wetem olgeta applications ia. Hemi no object long any long olgeta we oli sitaon forom se kes ia hemi bin stap over 13 years since hemi bin putum claim blong hem long kot mo sipos hemi object now bae kes hemi delay bakeken. Hemi se hem nao hemi shud object long Magistrate Nesbeth Wilson from ol diferen risons be forom hemi save se ino kat enough manpower long Magistrate Kot so hemi no object. Ol nara patis oli indicate se oli no gat objection long any wan we oli sitaon.

After long ol application ia kot iadjourn smol taem blong mekem dicision blong hem. Dicision igo olsem, mo mi quotem "...Having considered the applications by the two counter Claimants we have come to the conclusion that there is no way someone could know the custom owners where there is a transfer of lease form an alienator or other persons than the custom owner selling the land. As the Court has already explained, there are two different interests and we must not mix them together. Interest in land lease has nothing to do with the interest in custom land ownership.

Interlocutory applications or urgent applications court has already explain in to the parties, it is ok for the same people to hear the interlocutory application, as it is nothing to do with deciding who the custom land ownership is.

Being a member of Vaturisu Council of Chief, too the court has already explained to the parties. Unless the members have already deal with the same land dispute then they must not involve in this case. But if it is just because they are members and have worked with one of the parties in this case, we have decided that, that has nothing to do with deciding the custom land ownership.

Decision

Having said this, the Court is not satisfied with the reasons of the objections made by the above said parties.

We therefore have decided that we will continue to hear the Land Case No. 8 of 1993."

Kot idismisim application mo icontinue blong harem case.

Next application hemi blong Counter-Claimant namba 3 we hemi mekem application blong withdraw olsem wan pati hemwan mo apply blong joint wetem Original Claiman.

Spokes man hemi presentem wan letter we hemi read olsem mi quotem "...Mi nem blong me Kalere Shem, head of family Palupau. Family Palupau oli decide tru long wan meeting blong mifala blong mifala withdrawem land claim blong mifala. Risons we mifala decide blong withdrawem claim blong mifala hemi from: -

1. "Mifala iluk save se area we istat long Eratap kasem Rentapau River istap unda the authority of Jif Kalpoilep I.

2. Land baontri we istart long Teouma River kasem Rentapau River hemi blong Paramount Chief Kalpoilep I.

3. Every Counter-Claimants long Land Claim No.8 of 1993 oli ol tribes we oli stap lif anda long full authority blong Paramount Chief Kalpoilep I

4. Olgeta land boundaries we each Counter-Claimants oli stap claimen hemi olgeta land we Paramount Chief Kalpoilep I hemi dividem long each tribe.

5. Mifala sapotem map, mo claim blong family kalmet.

6. Mifala appointem Kalotuk Tom blong hemi witness long claim blong family Kalmet long behalf blong family Palupau."

Kot iaceptem application blong olgeta, mo grantem application blong Counter-Claimant No.3 blong join wetem Original Claiman.

Long namba 9 kasem 13 January kot ibin holem conference wetem olgeta patis mo sem taem sortem aot olgeta witnesses blong each pati mo tu stretem olgeta documents bifo kot istart blong harem actual case.