Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Supreme Court of Vanuatu

Barbou v Falealupo [2001] VUSC 62; Civil Appeal Case 006 of 2001 (29 June 2001)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF

THE REPUBLIC OF VANUATU

(Civil Jurisdiction)

ass="MsoNoMsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align: center; margin-top: 1; margin-bottom: 1"> Civil Appeal Case No.6 of 2001

BETWEEN:

LOUIS & LUTE BARspan>

Applicants

AND:

ALOISIO FALEALUPO

Respondent

Coram: Before Mr Justice Oliver A. Saksak

Ms Cynthia Thomas

Mrs Lute Barbou, Applicant in person

MGB">Mr Daniel Yahwa for the Respondent

Date: 29th June, 2001, 9 a.m.

RULING

UPON hearing submissions from Mrs Lute Barbou in respect of an oral application to vary the ordf the Court dated 30^thup>th April, 2001 to allow for payments of the sum of VT662,450 in six (6) equal instalments,

AND UPON hearing Mr Daniel Yahwa for the Respondent in response who does not oppose the application but who in turn seeks adequate security to be provided by the Applicant,

AND Satisfying myself on information already before the Court that the Respondent�s fear of the Applicant�s absconding from the jurisdiction of the Court is reasonable to warrant their request for the provision of adequate security by the Applicant�s,

AND on the other hand, acknowledging that the Aants are perfectly entitled to seek variation of the orders of this Court without t a need to appeal,

I therefore rule as follows:-

(1) ;&nspp; Tse Applicant�licatlication is allowed.

&nbspan> (2) The Ordfrs os thiouronle Cble Court as per Judgment dated 30^th April, 2001 are varied as follows:-

(a) &nnbsp; nbsp;&nbbsp;&nbs; &nbs;  p; The Appe Applicants/Appellants pay the sum of VT662,700 which includes interests and costs to the Respondent x equstalmof VT110.450 per month commencing on 10^th May, 2001 2001 and tand thereahereafter by or at the end of June, July, August, September and October, 2001 respectively.

(b) &nbssp;&nnsp;&&nsp; &nsp; &nbbp;&nnbsp; Ipan>In the event of failure by the Applicants to honour their commitment; or in thet tha Appls absfrom urisdn within 6 6 mo months and leaving the judgment unsatissatisfied fied in pain part, trt, the following equipments belonging to the Applicants are hereby attached:-

(i) &nnsp;&&nsp;;&nspp;&nssp;&nsp; an>1ponly Band sawmillwmill;

1"> <(iB">(ii) ;&nbssp; &nsp; &nsp;  p; &nnsp;&&nsp; 5 saw mials; and

: 1"> (iii) &nbsp &nbssp;&nnbp; &nsp; &nbbp;&nnbsp; 1 only skidderidder.

(c) &nnbsp; nbsp;&nbbsp;&nbs; &nbs;  p; The opee operation of Order (b) is stayed �

<

(i) & &nbsp &nbp; &&nbp;; &nnsp;& &nbp; &nbp; fpe a d of 6 mf 6 months until the end of October, 2001 after the payment of the last instalment, after which rder autoally be discharged; or

(ii) &nbssp;&nnsp;&&nsp; &nsp; &nbbp;&nnbsp; until the day day on which it is known to the Respondent that the Applicants abscofrom jurison le the ce of the jud judgment unsatisfied, which ever first orst occursccurs, in , in whichwhich case case Order (b) shall automatically be brought into effect and full force.

p class="MsoNoMsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-top: 1; margin-bottom: 1"> (3) & p;&nssp; Tsp; There bere be no order as to costs.

DATED at Luganville this 29^th day of June, 2001.

BY THE COURT

OLIVER A. SAKSAK

Judge

---

PacLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/vu/cases/VUSC/2001/62.html