Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Solomon Islands

Iu v Kenipereana [2013] SBHC 90; HCSI-CC 240 of 2011 (24 July 2013)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
(Mwanesalua J)

Civil Case No. 240 of 2011

BETWEEN:

MICHAEL IU, FRANCIS NAHO, PHILIP ARAHAIPEU, RAPHAEL HEAI AND VENASIO BASIARE
(Representing themselves and members of the Karenpuri Tribe of Tarapaina, South Malaita, Malaita Province)
Claimants

AND:

PETER KENIPEPEANA, JOE MANEUSUA AND STEPHEN KENIMOA
(Trading as Indispensible Lumber Company Limited)
First Defendants

AND:

SAMLINSAN (SI) LIMITED
Second Defendant

AND:

JOHN TOIRAENA, NELSON NAMONIA, JOHN KARIARAHA, PATRICK SIKOIASI AND ESTHER SUKAIA
Third Defendants

AND:

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
(Commissioner of Forest Resources)
Fourth Defendant

AND:

THE PROVINCIAL EXECUTIVE OF THE MALAITA PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT
Fifth Defendant

DATE OF RULING: 24 July 2013

Mr. Marahare for the Claimants
Mr. Ipo for John Kariaraha & Patrick Sikoiasi the second Defendants
Mr. Pitakaka for John Toiraena, Nelson Namonia & Esther Sukaia Second Defendants

RULING

1. This is an application by the Claimants against First and Second Defendants and their named agents and/or servants as follows: (1) The agents and/or servants of the First and Second Defendants namely Messrs Peter Kenipepeana, Joe Maneusua and Stephen Kenioma (Trading as Indispensable Lumber Co. Ltd), Mr. Junior Pau and Messrs George Wane, Patrick Aihunu, Peter Ha'ake Ruaimai, Lucian Aihunu and Ms Makulata Bisinaoha be punished for contempt of orders of the court made on 31st day of August 2011; (2) Costs of and incidental to this application and (3) such further and/or other orders as may be just in the circumstances.
   
2. The interim orders granted on 31 August 2011 and perfected on 1 September 2011 referred to in paragraph (1) above are relevantly in the following terms: "(1)..........,(2) The first, Second and Third Defendants, by themselves, their agents and/or servants are restrained from conducting further logging operations on Arai Land ("the Land") pending the determination of the question as to the ownership of the land before the appropriate forum or further orders of the court; (3) An interim order directing the First and Second Defendants, by themselves, their agents and/or servants to remove all their machines and equipment from the land pending the determination of the question as to the ownership of the land before the appropriate forum or further orders of the court; (4) An interim order that all the Merchantable logs felled from the land shall remain on the land, or if already removed from the land by the Second Defendant or its servants, agents or the contractor, be sold and all proceeds from the sale of the said logs be paid into court pending further orders of the court; (5) An order directing the First and Second Defendants to disclose all details pertaining logs extracted and account for the monies expended and/or paid by the Second Defendant pursuant to the logging operation on the land; (6) An order restraining the First and Third Defendants by themselves, their agents and/or servants from engaging in any dealing and/or negotiation over the said land pending the determination as to the question of the ownership of the land before the appropriate forum and/or further orders of the court".
   
3. The First and Second Defendants are companies and thus they are artificial persons. As such, they have natural persons to carry on their business. The First Defendant is the holder of Felling Licence No. A10736. On the other hand, the Second Defendant is engaged as a logging contractor by the First Defendant. It is responsible for the machines and equipment with which they conduct their logging operations on Arai land at the time when the interlocutory orders referred herein were issued against them.
   
4. There is evidence that the logs felled were removed from the land for export, the logging machines and equipment were used to remove the logs to the log pond and log truck to the seacoast for export. The logging machines were kept at the log pond for some months before they were finally removed from the land. All these activities were done in contempt of the court orders restraining the said companies and the named agents and/or servants whose names are set out in this application.
   
5. The First and the Second Defendants are therefore ordered to pay a fine of $4,000 each within 28 days, in default, their directors are to serve a week each in prison as punishment. The named agents and servant are to pay $500.00 each in 28 days, in default, each one of them to serve one week imprisonment. The Defendants are to pay the Claimants' costs of this application. Order accordingly.
   

THE COURT