Aimon Aure v Captain Peter Boko and The Independent State of Papua New Guinea

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Woods J
• Judgment Date: 11 August 1995
• Court: National Court
• Citation: [1996] PNGLR 85
• Year: 1996
• Judgement Number: N1346

National Court: Woods J

Judgment Delivered: 11 August 1995

N1346

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

AIMON AURE & OS

V

CAPTAIN PETER BOKO AND THE STATE

Mount Hagen

Woods J

2 August 1995

11 August 1995

STATE AGENTS — Actions for wrongs of officers of the Defence Force and Police — Practice and procedure in trials of multiple plaintiffs — Pre trial hearings and admission of evidence.

DAMAGES — Coronial inquiry — Assessment of property damage in village raids — exemplary damages on servants of the State — Proper valuation of village houses — Bare assertions of loss not sufficient.

Facts

Claim for damages arising out of destruction and looting by members of the police and defence forces under the command of Captain Peter Boko. A second claim is for exemplary damages.

Held

1. State is liable for the destruction of property caused by the Defence and Police personnel during the raid.

2. Bare assertion of value of loss not sufficient and Court must come up with reasonable value.

3. General damages in the order of K346,821.85 awarded against first and second defendants.

4. Exemplary damages of K71,500 awarded against first defendant.

Counsel

S Norum, for the plaintiffs.

P Kiele, for the defendants.

11 August 1995

WOODS J: The plaintiffs are all villagers from Gunagi in the Sina Sina area of the Chimbu Province and they are claiming damages for the looting and destruction of their houses and property by a squad of Defence Force soldiers and Police led by the first defendant Captain Peter Boko on 22, 23 July 1991. They are proceeding against the State as the Defence Force soldiers and police were acting as officers of the State and it is alleged that the actions of the officers of the State were without any legal justification or excuse. The plaintiffs are also claiming exemplary damages from the defendants.

The hearing of this claim was managed by pre-trial hearings and then the admission of the evidence by the filing of affidavits by the plaintiffs plus other documentary evidence. At the pre-trial hearings the State advised that it did not have any evidence to call to refute the claims of the plaintiffs, the State had no evidence to show that the raid or actions of the soldiers and police were done under any legal authority, nor was there any evidence challenging the status of the plaintiffs or the particulars of the claims of each plaintiff. I ruled that as the State was not bringing any evidence to refute the affidavit evidence of the plaintiffs there would be no need to call any of the deponents for cross-examination as it is was not appropriate to allow for speculative cross-examination. It was made clear at the pre-trial hearing that...