Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Reports of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands

  Download original PDF

Lasu v Petero [1966] TTLawRp 22; 3 TTR 199 (22 June 1966)

3 TTR 199

LASU, MUSKO, and NUSITA,
Plaintiffs

v.

PETERO and LOPU,
Defendants

Civil Action No. 333
Trial Division of the High Court
Truk District

June 22, 1966

Action to determine ownership to land located on Tol Island, in which defendants claim certain lineage lands as compensation for services rendered their deceased father, formerly member of lineage, in his last illness. The Trial Division of the High Court, Chief Justice E. P. Furber, held that compensation owed to person rendering care to deceased lineage member need not be paid in land; and that if defendants have claim for such compensation, it is merely as creditors of lineage and not as owners of any particular piece of lineage land.

1. Truk·Land Law - Lineage Ownership - Gifts

Under Truk custom, gift of lineage land by lineage member to his sons as payment for care rendered by them in his last illness is subject to review by matrilineal family.

2. Truk Custom - Care During Last Illness

While matrilineal lineage cannot properly deny obligation to pay compensation in one form or another for care rendered to lineage member in his last illness, if lineage failed without good cause to provide proper care for their deceased member, compensation need not necessarily be in land, but maybe paid in goods or money.

3. TrukCustom - Care During Last IOness

Where parties who rendered care to lineage member in his last illness are entitled to compensation from lineage, parties may only claim as creditors of lineage and not as owners of any particular piece of lineage land.

FURBER, Chief Justice

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Neither side has succeeded in showing any transfer of any of the lands in question made by the lineage with the consent of all of its adult members.

2. Nienmete and her husband Iakop, during the lifetime of their oldest son, Tira, directed that the lands Lechamal and Wichom should pass to their children as lineage lands.

3. Tira died without issue and without having made any specific disposition of the land Faninin.

4. After Tira's death, Nienmete and Iakop confirmed that Lechamal and Wichom should pass to their surviving children as lineage land and added as a further direction that Faninin, formerly owned by Tira, should also pass to their surviving children as lineage land, and this was concurred in by the surviving children.

5. No good cause has been given by the other lineage members for Kunut's attempt, with or without the assistance of his brother Nino, who pre-deceased him, to strip his lineage of these lands, divert them to himself, and then give two or all of them to his sons, the defendants Petero and Lopu.

OPINION