In The Choiseul Local Court
Held at Taro Station on the
16th day of July 2015.

Land Case no: 08/1998

Between: 

M. Mavokana 
(Rep: Leadly Mavokana)
Plaintiff

And: 

1. Edwin Kaboke 
2. Alwin Madada
(Rep: Francis & James)
Defendant

IN THE MATTER OF:
KIVIKIVILI LAND

Before: 	Luke Soko 	President	
	Rence Dako	Member	
	Christopher Makoni	''	
	Rochester Zutu	Clerk	
President welcomes both parties and introduces court members and procedures of the court.
Clerk- Before we proceed with the case there are some issues that we need to clarify. According to the case file we have no copy of unaccepted settlement form in the file. It is the most important document you must filed when appeal to local court.
If any one of both parties have the copy of the decision please you may tendered it to court.
Objection ----- No objection from both parties.
Clerk ----- Can we have the list of witnesses for both parties before we proceed?
Defendant — James Kaboke's statement.
The issue I stand is base on the appeal. What is the requirement on the local court act? Is there any written statement as to why the decision of the chief is not accepted? With that the court should dismiss this case and upheld the chief decision.
Francis Taniveke's statement.
To further add on to what Brother James has said, this case has been gone through chiefs hearing in 1998. Applicant should file the grounds of appeal on reason why the decision is not accepted. It's almost 17years the length of time since the applicant did not tendered anything, he has no right to file the case. For sure I know the decision is fine and perfect. The full statement is already given during the chief inquiry. Also site visit is already done by the chief. Only if the court up held the decision in 1998 chief inquiry.
Plaintiff - Leadly Mavokana's Statement.
Mr. President Iam the son of M. Mavokana. We did not say anything yet concerning this case. But if I present my submission then you will hear what I'm going to say about the issues. The decision made by the chief is not proper. I have something to say about it.
We were also surprised to have the copy of unaccepted settlement form today so we want the case to proceed.
Defendant's statement.
Before local court hear the case make sure all requirement must fulfilled when filing the case to local court. Local court must review what the chief talks about and to view what issues are not correct. eg.Geneology, boundary or ownership.
Plaintiffs Statement.
The decision was given out verbally after one year and four months. The chiefs only advise us to pay the local court fee to refer the matter to the court. Apart from it they did not tell us to file any document which required by the local court act.
Clerk: The court will adjourn until tomorrow for ruling at 9.00am -17/07/15.
COURT ADJOURN
COURT RESUME AGAIN -9.00AM 17/07/2015
President — welcome everybody in court and declare that Lauru local court is going to proceed and the clerk will read out the ruling from yesterday's issues.
Clerk thanks the president for the introduction.
Since we have been adjourn this case from yesterday due to some preliminary issues to be shorted out by the court. Court has discussed over it and finally makes its decision.
RULING
The court considered that under the section 12 (1) (a) (c) of the local court act, there were requirement to be fulfilled when filing an appeal to local court. In this case the requirement is not fulfilled. There is no written statement as to why the decision is not accepted. Without this requirement this court has no power to hear this matter. Therefore this matter is struck out and the court up held the chiefs decision.
Liberty applies — Plaintiff need to short out all requirements if you wish to make an appeal to local court to re-open the case for fresh hearing. Otherwise both parties need to settle out few things between yourself.
No further order from the court.
Dated at Taro on the 17th day of July 2015
Luke Soko - President
Rence Dako- Member
Christopher Makoni- Member
Rochester Zutu- Clerk