Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Kiribati

Tabutoa v Tiare [2008] KIHC 28; Civil Case 20 of 2008 (7 August 2008)

In the High Court of Kiribati
Civil Jurisdiction
Held at Betio
Republic of Kiribati

High Court Civil Case 20 of 2008

Between:

Timon Tabutoa
Applicant

And:

Taoatu Tiare for Tiare Tabutoa
1st Respondent

Nenetaake Kabure
2nd Respondent

Attorney General iro Lands Court
3rd Respondent

For the Applicant: Mr Karotu Tiba
For the 1st Respondent: Sr Bernadette Eberi
For the 2nd Respondent: Mr Mantaia Kaongotao

Date of Hearing: 7 August 2008

JUDGMENT
(Ex Tempore)

Application for certiorari to quash the decision in CN BA 329/89 given 19 years ago next Saturday.

The applicant, Mr Tiba’s client asserts that he did not know about the decision until 2007 even though, it seems, he and his siblings and their families and the respondents have been living on the land together, in his case since he came back from Nauru in 1993. If he were to persuade the Court to extend the time within which to bring the application, the substance of his argument is that the land is too small to be divided. Yet that was the decision in 1989. The land was divided between two brothers, half each to Tabutoa and to Kabure. And so it has been all this time.

I find it very difficult to believe that the applicant could not have known about the decision, living as he was since 1993 on the land with the other members of the families. I notice he is speaking for himself and his siblings. Yet there is nothing to establish that none of the siblings knew either.

After hearing the arguments of counsel, time within which to bring the application will not be extended: it is far too late now after so long.

I may add that I heard Mr Tiba’s argument on the substance of the application. The argument ignores the principle of certainty of title. Those who went to the Court in 1989 and their descendants are entitled after 19 years to assume that their title is certain, indefeasible: that it will not be disturbed.

Time within which to bring the application will not be extended. The application is refused.

THE HON ROBIN MILLHOUSE QC
Chief Justice