Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Supreme Court of Vanuatu

Ronlias v Ronlias [2001] VUSC 5; Civil Appeal Case 014 of 1999 (14 February 2001)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF

THE REPUBLIC OF VANUATU

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

Civil Appeal Case No.14 of /span>

BETWEEN:

WILLIAM RONLIAS

Appellant

AND:

p class="MsoNoMsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align: center; margin-top: 1; margin-bottom: 1"> WINSTOLIAS

Respondent

Coram: Before Mr Justice Oliver A. Saksak

Ms Cynthia Thomas, Clerk

Mr Jack I. Kilu for the Appellant

Mr Saling N. Stephens for the Respondent

JUDGEMENT

The Appellant was the Defendant in a civil action in the Senior Magistrate’s filed as Civil Case No.121 of 1999. On 2^nd December, 1999 the Senior Magistrate Ordered the Defendant to deliver to the Plaintiff a herd of cattle on or before 2^nd January, 2000. The Defendant appealed.

This has jurisdiction to strike out an appeal summarily where in the opinion of the CourtCourt the grounds of appeal of the appellant fails to disclose reasonable grounds of appeal. This discretion is provided for under Order 60 Rule 4 of the High Court Rules 1964.

The Appellant’s Notice of Appeal filed on 21^st December 1999 contains nothing to show that what the Court below did on 2 December 1999 was wrong in law or in fact.

Rather it contains statement ng what the Defendant omitted to do on 2^nd DecemDecember, 1999 during the hearing.

The record of proceedings the Court below shows that when the claim of the plaintiff was put to him the Defe Defendant said this:

p class="MsoNoMsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-top: 1; margin-bottom: 1"> “The Plaintiff is my younger brother. I accept his claim in its totality.”span>

The claim was not disputed thee no evidence was necessary to be heard. The Order was made made upon the appellant’s acceptance of his brother’s (plaintiff’s) claim in its entirety. Surely there is nothing wrong with the doing of the Court below. There is therefore nothing appellable against that order. For those reasons I now order that:-

lass="MsoNoMsoNormal" style="text-indent: -35.45pt; margin-left: 70.9pt; margin-top: 1; margin-bottom: 1"> (1) style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> &nbsp &nbssp;&nnbp; &nsp; &nbbp;&nnbsp; This appeal beal be dismissed.

an laN-GB"e="font-sont-size: ize: 12.0p12.0pt">&nt">

(2) nbsp; p; &nbp; &nbssp; pan>The Appe Appellant lant will be pay the Respondent’s costs of this appeal and of the Court blow.

DATED at Luganville this 14^th day of February, 2001.

BY THE COURT

Judge