![]() |
[Home]
[Databases]
[WorldLII]
[Search]
[Feedback]
[Report an error]
[F.A.Q.]
Supreme Court of Vanuatu |
[Recent Decisions] [Noteup] [Download] [Help]
IN
THE SUPREME COURT OF VANUATU
LAND
APPEAL CASE No. 14 of 1986
at
Malekula, 29th April 1986
IN
THE MATTER
OF
GIDEON
PAUL,
WILLIE
TUN
Appellants
AND:
IN
THE MATTER OF
PETER
DAN
Respondent
CORAM: Mr Justice F.G.
COOKE, CHIEF JUSTICE
CUSTOM
ADVISERS: PETER ANDRE
WILLIE BOE
INTERPRETER:
CHRISTINA NARUN
JUDGMENT
This is a dispute to land
at Botolwof set out on the surveyors plan. It is the only land this judgment
deals with.
This case was first
tried in the village court when the land was divided between the parties.
Attempt were made to have the customary
ownership of the land decided by the
area council of chiefs but the parties would not agree to
some.
The dispute was then brought
to the Island Court who gave judgment in favour of Peter Dan the Respondent in
this appeal. The judgment
of the Island Court was not acceptable to the parties
and the appellants Gideon, Paul and Willie Tun appealed to this court against
the decision of the Island
Court.
I had on this appeal two
custom advisers Peter Andre and William
Boe.
I considered all the evidence
given by the parties before the Island Court, heard the three appellants and the
Respondent and visited
the
area.
The first Appellant was
Gideon who stated that everyone in the area knows he is from the disputed area.
He states the disputed area
is an independent station as its language and
dialect is different from that spoken in other areas. He states that Botolwof
the disputed
area and Danmiel the next area are two different places having
distinct Nasaras, Chiefs and Boundaries. The land of Botolwof goes
down to the
sea at Espigle Bay and not through Danmiel. He said he claims the land
accordingly to custom as his father and grandfather
has been on the land for
many many years. He stated the Village Court was right when it gave them all
rights. He further stated that
his father sowed coconuts trees near the sea in
1938 when they moved to that area because of the fight with the bush people in
the
North. The other parties do not contest his rights to seven hectares of land
under coconut trees which it is alleged his father purchased.
I hold that Gideon
is customary owner of the seven hectares purchased and to the land in dispute
area near Orone as set out on the
survey
plan.
Secondly Willie Tun, the
Appellant states that he lives at Matavat No 2 with his parents and grandparent
since 1901. His case is that
the land was given to him by his grandfather, Chief
Daniel, his uncle Chief Ham and Chief Malachi his grandfather’s brother.
He agrees that the land follows the male line and that the last person to give
him that land was Chief Malachi who married a woman
from Tanmial but there was
no children of that marriage. His grandmother was a daughter of Chief Daniel who
was a brother of Chief
Malachi, so he has inheritance by direct relationship
with the three chiefs. I am advised by my custom advisers that the land follows
the male line and further that as there was no children of Chief Malachi and his
wife, only certain rights follows Chief Malachi
and wife who is still living
with the Respondents father at Tanmial. I
met the man who is over one hundred years of age and blind and who was not able
to help me with this case. I
consider Willie Tun has a good claim under custom
to some of the land in Botolwof and allow his appeal. I consider him to be
entitled
one third owner of the land in the disputed area and to be entitled to
one third of the coconut trees in the disputed
area.
Thirdly the third Appellant,
Paul. He has stated that he is entitled to part of the disputed area by virtue
of a. custom of two persons
coming from fruit trees. The other appellants state
they are unaware of such a custom but one of my custom advisers inform me that
such a custom does exist. He said the Village Court gave judgment in his favour
provided he divided the land with two other
appellants.
Having considered his
case I am of the opinion that he is also entitled to one third of the disputed
area together with one third
of the number of coconut trees in the disputed
area. I therefore allow his appeal and award him ownership of one third of the
property
in the disputed area together with one third of the total number of
coconut trees in the disputed
area.
Fourthly the Respondent,
Peter Dan. It is accepted that he had gardens in the disputed land for some
years. He stated his parents
own a parcel of land at Tanmial up to the border
with Botolwof the disputed area. It is further stated by him that his ancestors
worked the disputed land for many years because he contends that Botolwof and
Danmiel are one people. The appellant do not agree
to this contention, infect
Gideon says that they are quite distinct areas with Nasaras, Chiefs and
Boundaries. Peter Pan contends
that the dispute only arose when the people were
chased out of their land in the North by the bush people and came down to the
sea
front. He also stated that Chief Malachi’s wife is still alive and
living with his father at Tanmiel. He claims that Malachi’s
wife is his
grandmother. Not a direct grandmother but because of close relationship with the
family he and his family called Malachi,
grandfather. I consider all the family
of Malachi and friends who lived so closed together that a family relationship
did develop
and the old people were treated as grandparents of the younger
generation as though there was a blood relationship. In my opinion
Peter Dan has
a claim in custom because of such relationship and accordingly I award him one
third of the property and one third
of the coconut trees on the disputed land as
set out on the survey plan.
One
third of the area nearer Navtar on survey plan goes to Peter Dan. The middle one
goes to Paul and the one third nearer to Oroni
on survey plan goes to Willie
Tun. It may happen that one third of the coconut trees awarded may lie within
the awarded area of Peter
Dan, Paul or Willie Tun. If so, then only the fruits
of coconut trees are awarded and not the land on which they
stand.
Gideon is only awarded that
area in the disputed land which is fenced off and shown on the survey
plan.
Each party to this appeal
will pay to the court the sum seven thousand three hundred and thirty five vatu
each for the survey plan
to date. A further sum may have to be paid for the
surveyor to mark out the division of the land and the area of each party’s
coconut trees.
Frederick
G.
Cooke
7/5/86
Custom
Advisor:
Peter
Andre
Willie Boe
PacLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback|
Report an error
URL: http://www.paclii.org/vu/cases/VUSC/1986/15.html