IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS.
(Faukona J).

Civil Case No. 167 of 2002.

BETWEEN:

ANTIPAS AND LASI PELOKO
Judgment Creditors.

AND:

NORTH NEW GEORGIA TIMBER COPORATION
Judgment Debtor

Date of Hearing: 14th December, 2012.
Date of Ruling: 21st December, 2012.

MR. W. Rano for the Judgment Creditors.
Mrs N. Tongarutu for the Judgment Debtor.

RULING.

Faukona J: This application was filed by one Julekana Alekevu pursuant to rule 3.28 that he be substituted as a Claimant in place of the judgment creditors, Mr. Antipas Tutuo who had died and Lasi Peloko who is incapacitated through old age.

2.	This application premises on after obtaining judgment on 23rd May, 2011, the applicant noted that there were certain elements within the tribe acted against the interest of the tribe, in particular Mr Lasi Kikiboe, the son of Lasi Peloke, the only surviving chief who is also a representative in the board of four tribal chiefs.

3.	By schedule 2 paragraph 3 (B) of the North New Georgia Timber Corporation Act states that where the tribal chief specified in paragraph ceases to be such chief, his success appointed with customary law applicable to his tribe shall have the authority to represent his tribe in the Corporation. Such successor shall have the authority to nominate, from time to time, any one of the members of his tribe, to represent his tribe in the Corporation.

4.	To appoint a successor of a ceased chief the successor must be appointed by customary law applicable to his tribe. In this case the applicant Mr Alekevu relies on the fact that he was voted by his tribe to prosecute the proceedings in place of late Tutuo. To affirm that a letter of 27th October, 2011, signed by sixteen individuals endorsed the appointment of the applicant to take over from the late Jamakana in representing both the Judgment creditors in this case.

5.	Further to that, the 1st Judgment creditor by his letter dated 9th November, 2004, appointed the applicant Mr Alekevu to replace him in this case.

6.	By minute of the Chiefs committee held at Ramata village on 11th December 2011, agreed with full support that Chief Lasi Peloko is very old or has memory loss and unable to write and sign letters or documents. The Committee also resolved that Mr Kikiboy Lasi is not representing Gerasi tribe. However, the Committee did not resolve by mentioning name of a person to replace Chief Lasi Peloko. It appears as the minute was an open one without concluding on important agenda as to who should replace Chief Lasi. Even Chief Lasi himself by his letter dated 9th November, 2004, appointed Mr. Okano Jamakana who had been deceased. 

7.	It appears to me that the support and appointment by customary law favours the applicant to substitute Chief Antipas Tutuo who had died.

8.	So far as Chief Lasi Peloko is concerned schedule 2 (B) of the Act clearly defines that a successor have absolute authority to nominate, from time to time, any one of the members of his tribe to represent his tribe in the Corporation. In this case a letter date 6th November 2008, attached to Kikiboy Lasi's sworn statement filed on 10th December, 2012, in which Chief Lasi, the only surviving chief had appointed his son Refrain Kikiboy Lasi to take his place as successor. Chief Lasi admitted in his letter that he was very old, weak and he needed replacement.

9.	Apparently the evidence clearly shows that the applicant Mr. Alekevu cannot substitute Chief Lasi for two reasons. One that he is not a member of the tribe of Chief Lasi and secondly as the only surviving Chief he had declared his appointment clear and precise.

10.	Having said that I concluded that the applicant Mr Alekevu can substitute the 1st Judgment creditor the late Anitipus Tutuo but not Chief Lasi Peloko. 

Orders:

1.	Application that Mr. Alekevu to substitute 2nd Judgment Creditor Chief Lasi refused, but application to substitute Chief late Tutuo's, the first Judgment Creditor granted.

2.	Cost in the cause.

The Court.