PacLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

High Court of Kiribati

You are here:  PacLII >> Databases >> High Court of Kiribati >> 2025 >> [2025] KIHC 69

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Decisions | Noteup | LawCite | Download | Help

Taie v Iotebwa [2025] KIHC 69; Miscellaneous Application 02669 of 2025 (15 October 2025)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KIRIBATI

LAND JURISDICTION


MISC APP 2025-02669 from HCLA 38 of 2017


BETWEEN:
TEBANO TAIE, ROTIMERI TAARA, VERONIKA TAAKIRI AND OTHERS

Appellant


AND
IOANE IOTEBWA AND OTHERS

Respondent


Date of Hearing:
Date of Judgment:
16 September 2025
15 October 2025
Appearances
Mr Titabu Tabane for the Applicants

Ms. Botika Maitinnara for the Respondent





R U L I N G


  1. On 19 August 2025, I granted leave for this miscellaneous application to relist this appeal case, HCLA 38 of 2017, for hearing. The appeal was struck out for want of prosecution on 28 January, the beginning of this year, when both parties failed to attend the hearing.
  2. At the hearing today, both counsels appeared. The counsel for the applicant explained to the court that his client was not aware of the hearing on January 28 of this year. This is because the notice of hearing was served upon the office of the people's lawyer. The applicants, through counsel, explained that they left the services of the people's lawyers' office in 2023 and engaged a new lawyer, Mr. Tabane. Mr. Tabane did not attend the hearing because he was not served with the notice of hearing.
  3. Considering both parties' submissions, we believe the applicants provide a reasonable excuse for their non-attendance. We also agree that this case must be listed for rehearing because the first ground of appeal has merit. Both counsels agree that the appellants could not be evicted from the land Kabinea 564i because they own that plot of land. The decision should have evicted them from Kabinea 564e, which belongs to the respondents.
  4. Grounds two and three also raise legal issues. Unfortunately, the parties did not submit any arguments on these two grounds, and this Court cannot determine their merits after reviewing the concerned court minutes, CN 45 of 2016, because they were poorly handwritten. For this reason, the court agrees to allow the appeal to be scheduled for a rehearing.
  5. No order as to cost.

TETIRO SEMILOTA MAATE MOANIBA
Chief Justice of the High Court


TAIBO TEBAOBAO TABAKITOA TEMOKOU
Land Appeal Magistrate Land Appeal Magistrate


PacLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/ki/cases/KIHC/2025/69.html