IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT APIA

BETWEEN:

LISONA T. LAVEA
of Vini-fou, Counsellor.
Plaintiff

AND:

FALESELAU TULI LEVASA
of Vailele, Police Officer.
Defendant

Counsel: Mr P. Fepuleai for the Plaintiff
Mr S. Toailoa for the Defendant

Date of Hearing: 28th October 1999
Date of Decision: 14th February 2001

RULING OF VAAI J.

By deeds dated the 21st July 1983 the plaintiff leased from the Alii & Faipule of Vailele parcels of land at Vailele for a period of 19 years at an annual rent of $1.50. At the time of the execution at the deed of lease the plaintiff was the holder of a matai title from Vailele but that title was subsequently removed by a decision of the Land and Titles Court. The defendant is married to the niece of the plaintiff and since 1984 has been living on one of the parcels free of charge and with the permission of the plaintiff. On one of the parcels the plaintiff did erect a dwelling house and both parties lived peacefully initially; but the cordial relationship endured a short life. It is unnecessary to divulge into the several incidents not only between the parties themselves but also with third persons. Essentially however the plaintiff lost his matai title and he also ceased to live on the leased land although he did visit regularly as he did plant some crops on the land. On his return to Samoa from one of his overseas trips the plaintiff discovered that the defendant has discarded his temporary home and built a permanent home. When the plaintiff confronted the defendant the plaintiff was told that he (the plaintiff) is no longer the lessee as the defendant has a lease from the Alii & Faipule of Vailele.

Obviously the defendant has rallied the support of some of the matais of Vailele in an attempt to revoke the lease to the plaintiff and to lease the same lands to the defendant. The solicitor who prepared the leases for the Alii & Faipule of Vailele was consulted by the Vailele Land Committee with a request to revoke the lease to the plaintiff on the grounds that he no longer holds a matai title from Vailele and that he is not rendering service to the village. The request was rightfully rejected. Despite the legal advice the defendant and his supporters have continued with the onslaught to oust the plaintiff who has an existing binding lease of the said land. 

The defendant has refused to vacate the leased land despite several demands by the plaintiff. He has no justifiable grounds to remain on the land. He has no valid lease. The defendant and his family are ordered to remove his house and any other buildings he built on the said land and vacate the said land within 3 months. The defendant is ordered to pay to the plaintiff $500.00 costs.

JUDGE VAAI