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

Sifoburi v Pentani [2023] SBHC 24; HCSI-CC 147 of 2021 (6 March 2023)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CIVIL JURISDICTION

Civil Case No. 147 of 2021

BETWEEN

STEPHEN SIFOBURI
Claimant

AND:

PITSON PENTANI
1^st Defendant

AND:

SOLOMON STAR COMPANY LIMITED
2^nd Defendant

Date of Hearing: 6 March 2023
Date of Ruling: 6 March 2023

Mr. J Iroga for the Claimant
Mr. R. Firigeni for the 1^st & 2^nd Defendant

Lawry, PJ

JUDGMENT

1. On 18 January 2017 the First Defendant as an employee of the Second Defendant drove a vehicle Registration number MA 9685 negligently which resulted in a collision with a building owned by the Claimant.
2. The First Defendant was convicted in the Magistrate’s Court of careless driving in relation to this incident.
3. The Claimant filed the claim on 31 March 2021 and served that claim on the Second Defendant on 8 April 2022. Personal service on the First Defendant had been unsuccessful. The Court granted an application for substituted service on 26 August 2022 and the First Defendant was served by advertisement on 23 September 2022.
4. Neither the First Defendant nor the Second Defendant have filed either a response nor a Defence. The Claimant has filed an application for judgment following that default pursuant to Rule 9.17 of the Solomon Islands Courts (Civil Procedure Rules) 2009.
5. The material filed by the Claimant shows that the quotation by the engineer included works that were not to repair damage resulting from the collision. The Claimant filed a statement sworn on 30 March 2021. In that statement he annexed a report from Pac-Eng Limited, an engineering company. That report set out the work required to repair the building. It also included a quotation for additional works to be undertaken. Clearly neither the First nor the Second Defendant is liable for the additional work which included relocating a toilet facility and electrical rewiring. The work to restore the building was 215,173.96 plus labour, transport, tax and the engineer’s professional fee.
6. The Claimant is entitled to judgment for $215, 173.96 plus 40% of that sum for labour costs that is $86,069.58. He is entitled to transport costs of $21,517.39 and to tax of $43,034.79. That totals $365,794.93. The engineer’s professional fee was 10 percent of that total which makes a total for judgment of $402,374.42.

The Claimant is also entitled to interest on the judgment sum at the rate of 5% per annum from the date the cause of action arose which was 18 January 2017. [Pursuant to Rule 17.65].

Interest continues to accuse on the judgment sum at the rate of 5% per annum

Orders

1. The action of the First Defendant amounts to negligence.
2. The Second Defendant is liable for the action of the First Defendant as the owner of the vehicle and the employer of the First Defendant.
3. The First and Second Defendant are to pay damages to the Claimant in the sum of $402, 374.42.
4. The First and Second Defendants are to pay interest on judgment sum from 18 January 2018 to 6 March 2023 being $123,302.96.
5. The First and Second Defendants are to pay interest on the amount for which judgment was entered at the rate of 5 percent per annum on the amount of the judgment debt that is unpaid on and after 6 March 2017. This further order for interest is not payable by the First and Second Defendants if the judgment debt is paid in full within 28 days of 6 March 2023.
6. The First and Second Defendants are to pay the Claimants costs on the standard basis.

By the Court
Hon. Justice Howard Lawry
Puisne Judge