-
Tatalani Builders Ltd v Bobby, SICOA-CAC 38 of 2019 (Appeal from HCSI-CC 9 of 2014) (12 August 2022)
effect of default judgment – default judgment means the case is at an end and the issue of liability is res judicata – once default judgment entered the cause of action is at an end and the parties are prevented from re-agitating matter before the court unless it was an application to set aside the…
-
Xhu Mindi v Attorney General, HCSI-CC 127 of 2019 (4 July 2022)
judicial review – preliminary issue of law – resumption of land – where Commissioner of Lands issued notice to resume land pursuant to clause 3 of grant instrument for public purpose – whether resumption contrary to section 71(1) of the Land and Titles Act and section 8 of the Constitution – Anthony Chee Ming Wong…
-
Gaso Land Development Co-operative Ltd v Riupita, HCSI-CC 498 of 2018 (18 November 2022)
equitable interest over registered land – whether defendant held equitable interest over land and entitled to damages for trespass by claimant – where Commissioner of Lands had offered grant of fixed term estate in parcel to defendant – where defendant had paid the premium for the grant – payment of premium is acceptance of offer…
-
HHD Development Limited v Natei, HCSI-CC 189 of 2017 (23 September 2022)
summary judgment – preliminary issue of law – whether defendants have acquired ownership interest over registered land from adverse possession – defendants occupied registered land for at least 12 years prior to claimant becoming registered owner of the registered land after purchasing it from the previous registered owner – previous registered owner commenced proceedings against…
-
Suhara v Attorney General, HCSI-CC 562 of 2015 (30 September 2022)
recusal – whether judge’s earlier statements in interlocutory application were conclusive statements on the substance of proceedings and judge would not be impartial – a judge who has made adverse findings against any litigant is not disqualified to hear same case against same litigant even if judge has made adverse findings and expressed typical judicial…
-
Dokama v Choiseul Western Customary Land Appeal Court, HCSI-CC 502 of 2018 (Appeal from CLAC) (30 September 2022)
CLAC appeal – evidence – application to adduce 2 determinations from timber rights hearing as new evidence after appeal book compiled – whether court should grant leave for new evidence to be adduced in appeal – whether new evidence is necessary or relevant as evidence in appeal – evidence relevant to appeal are Chief’s decision…
-
Olsson v Solomon Time Limited, SICOA-CAC 19 of 2021 (Appeal from HCSI-CC 417 of 2006) (22 November 2022)
judgment debt – enforcement to recover judgment debt – judgment debt outstanding – company subject to judgment debt went into voluntary liquidation – expiry of enforcement order under court rules – expiry of enforcement order means there is nothing left in force to amend or vary or extend – enforcement order to recover judgment debt…
-
Djokovic v Attorney General, SICOA-CAC 3 of 2021 (Appeal from HCSI-CC 335 of 2020) (4 November 2022)
citizenship – avoidance of dual nationality – appellant born in Solomon Islands pre-independence to an indigenous Solomon Islander mother – appellant granted Australian citizenship as minor – whether an indigenous Solomon Islander is automatically a Solomon Islands citizen – appellant did not renounce or lose nationality of Australia after attaining 18 years of age –…
-
Dettke v Bartlett, SICOA-CAC 12 of 2021 (Appeal from HCSI-CC 152 of 2012) (4 November 2022)
want of prosecution – lawyer representing claimant withdrew – claimant delayed to obtain replacement lawyer for over 3 months – delay by claimant to obtain replacement lawyer demonstrated lack of diligence and expedition and was unacceptable – claimant delayed by over 7 months to file application to reinstate claim after claim was dismissed – delay…
-
LB Construction and Joinery v Attorney General, SICOA-CAC 21 of 2021 (Appeal from HCSI-CC 208 of 2019) (4 November 2022)
security for costs – security for costs unpaid – over 12 months since security for costs should have been paid – time to challenge amount of security for costs is at directions hearing – counsel admits that appellant would not be able to pay security for costs even if given further time – unacceptable and…