In the High Court of Kiribati
Land Jurisdiction
Held at Betio
Republic of Kiribati

High Court Land Appeal 82 of 2004

Between:

Binataake Raweaitina
Appellant

And:

Momoi Tikaa
Respondent

For the Appellant: Mr Banuera Berina
For the Respondent: Ms Taoing Taoaba

Date of Hearing: 11 February 2005

JUDGMENT
(Ex Tempore)

The point at issue is whether agreement by a landowner to the building of a seawall on her land must be in writing. We know of no reason why it should be. The agreement may be in writing or it may be oral or it may be assumed if the owner knowing about the building does nothing but allows it to be built.

Ms Taoaba sought to rely on S.15(1) of the Lands Code which requires the Court to decide only if the land owner has refused to agree to the building. There is no evidence of a refusal. S.15(1) does not apply.

The facts are that the appellant was living on land formed by his building of a seawall, beginning the building in 2000. The respondent lived nearby and it is difficult to believe she did not know the appellant was building the seawall but that is a matter for evidence.

The case should be returned to the Magistrates’ Court for rehearing in accordance with these reasons: that an agreement to build a seawall may be oral or in writing.

The appeal is allowed, the decision of the Single Magistrate quashed and the case returned for rehearing.

THE HON ROBIN MILLHOUSE QC
Chief Justice

BETERO KAITANGARE
Magistrate

RARATU IEITA
Magistrate