Rimbink Pato v Anthony Manjin, Abraham Hulapmoni also known as Abraham Moni, Bruno (a Male), Masket Iangalio, MP And Peter Ipatas, MP
Jurisdiction | Papua New Guinea |
Judge | Sheehan J, Sevua J, Akuram J |
Judgment Date | 30 April 1999 |
Court | Supreme Court |
Citation | [1999] PNGLR 6 |
Year | 1999 |
Judgement Number | SC622 |
Supreme Court: Sheehan J, Sevua J, Akuram J
Judgment Delivered: 30 April 1999
SC622
PAPUA NEW GUINEA
[In the Supreme Court of Justice]
SCA 07 of 1999
SCA 109 of 1998
BETWEEN: RIMBINK PATO
Applicant
AND: ANTHONY MANJIN
First Respondent
AND: ABRAHAM HULAPMONI
also known as ABRAHAM
MONI
Second Respondent
AND: BRUNO (a male)
Third Respondent
AND: MASKET IANGALIO, MP
Fourth Respondent
AND: PETER IPATAS, MP
Fifth Respondent
Waigani: Sheehan, Sevua & Akuram JJ
1999: 27th & 30th April
Practice and Procedure — Application for leave to appeal — Interlocutory injunction by National Court restraining police officers from investigating and arresting applicant — Discharge of interlocutory injunction by National Court — Whether leave required to appeal — Whether leave should be granted to appeal against discharge of interlocutory injunction — Section 14(3)(b) Supreme Court Act.
Where applicant sought, and was granted an interlocutory injunction restraining the first, second and third respondents from investigating and arresting him, and the interlocutory injunction was subsequently discharged on application by the respondents.
HELD: 1. The grant of leave pursuant to s.14(3)(b) of the Supreme Court Act is in the discretion of the Court and is neither automatic nor granted as a matter of course.
2. For leave to be granted, an applicant must advance consent and convincing reasons or exceptional circumstances; there must be clear legal grounds meriting an appeal, and he must have an arguable case.
3. The balance of convenience did not favour the applicant thereby warranting the sustenance and extension of the interlocutory injunction.
4. The applicant has the right under s.57 Constitution to enforce his constitutional rights in respect of a criminal prosecution if he alleges that his rights have been violated. Similarly, he has the right to sue for defamation under the Defamation Act if he claims his reputation has been injured and his character defamed.
5. Leave is refused in both applications.
CASE CITED:
Henzy Yakham & Anor -v- Meriam & Meriam, SC 533, 27th November, 1997.
I. Molloy for Applicant
C. Coady for 1st, 2nd & 3rd Respondents
B. Andrew for 4th Respondent
L. Henao for 5th Respondent
30th April, 1999
BY THE COURT: The applicant has filed two applications for leave for this Court's determination. The first application is in respect of orders made by Woods, J on 4th and 11th December, 1998. The second application relates to the orders of Woods, J made on 17th December, 1998.
The applicant commenced proceedings by originating summons (OS 565 of 1998) against the first three respondents initially. The proceedings were in respect of claims by the applicant that the respondents had conspired with the fourth and fifth respondents to injure his reputation as a prominent lawyer and a politician and also to breach his constitutional rights by arresting him and charging him with criminal offences relating to the 1997 National Elections in Enga.
On 23rd October, 1998, Sheehan, J granted an interim injunction order. Order No. 3 states:
"Pending further order, the defendants and each of them by themselves, and by their respective fellow police officer (sic), servants and agents restrained (sic) from attempting or purporting to arrest the plaintiff or to otherwise interfere with his liberty on the basis of any matter...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Dan Salmon Kakaraya v The Ombudsman Commission of Papua New Guinea and The Independent State of Papua New Guinea (2003) N2478
...and Others (SCM 2 of 2002) (Unnumbered and Unreported Judgment of the Supreme Court dated 1 May 2002), Rimbink Pato v Anthony Manjin [1999] PNGLR 6, Sir Julius Chan v Ombudsman Commission [1998] PNGLR 171, Application of Christopher Haiveta (1998) N1783, Philp Kian Seng Lee v John Pundari (......
-
Eremas Wartoto v The State (2015) SC1411
...Kaluwin and the State (2014) N4813 Grand Chief Sir Michael Thomas Somare v. Chronox Manek (2011) SC1118. Rimbink Pato v. Anthony Manjin [1999] PNGLR 6. Simon Ketan v. Lawyers Statutory Committee & Anor (2001) N2290. Pius Nui v. Tanda (2004) N2765. Bank of Papua New Guinea and Wilson Kamit v......
-
Chief Collector of Taxes v Bougainville Copper Limited and SCA No 56 of 2005; Bougainville Copper Limited v Chief Collector of Taxes (2007) SC853
...Ltd v The National Executive Council (1999) N1920; NHC v Yama Security Services Pty Ltd [2000] PNGLR 69; Rimbink Pato v Anthony Manjin [1999] PNGLR 6; Mauga Logging Co Pty Ltd v South Pacific Oil Palm Development Pty Ltd (No 1) [1977] PNGLR 80; Kurt Reimann v George Skell (2001) N2093; IIRC......
-
Pondros Kaluwin and Others v Honourable Christopher Seseve Haiveta and Others
...Adopted and applied Eremas Wartoto v. The State (2015) SC141 (the Eremas Wartoto case), Somare v. Manek (2011) SC1118, Pato v. Manjin [1999] PNGLR 6, Pius Pundi v. Chris Rupen (2015) 5. Section155 (4) of the Constitution has been abused more than its proper use and as the Court has gone on ......
-
Eremas Wartoto v The State (2015) SC1411
...Kaluwin and the State (2014) N4813 Grand Chief Sir Michael Thomas Somare v. Chronox Manek (2011) SC1118. Rimbink Pato v. Anthony Manjin [1999] PNGLR 6. Simon Ketan v. Lawyers Statutory Committee & Anor (2001) N2290. Pius Nui v. Tanda (2004) N2765. Bank of Papua New Guinea and Wilson Kamit v......
-
Dan Salmon Kakaraya v The Ombudsman Commission of Papua New Guinea and The Independent State of Papua New Guinea (2003) N2478
...and Others (SCM 2 of 2002) (Unnumbered and Unreported Judgment of the Supreme Court dated 1 May 2002), Rimbink Pato v Anthony Manjin [1999] PNGLR 6, Sir Julius Chan v Ombudsman Commission [1998] PNGLR 171, Application of Christopher Haiveta (1998) N1783, Philp Kian Seng Lee v John Pundari (......
-
Chief Collector of Taxes v Bougainville Copper Limited and SCA No 56 of 2005; Bougainville Copper Limited v Chief Collector of Taxes (2007) SC853
...Ltd v The National Executive Council (1999) N1920; NHC v Yama Security Services Pty Ltd [2000] PNGLR 69; Rimbink Pato v Anthony Manjin [1999] PNGLR 6; Mauga Logging Co Pty Ltd v South Pacific Oil Palm Development Pty Ltd (No 1) [1977] PNGLR 80; Kurt Reimann v George Skell (2001) N2093; IIRC......
-
Pondros Kaluwin and Others v Honourable Christopher Seseve Haiveta and Others
...Adopted and applied Eremas Wartoto v. The State (2015) SC141 (the Eremas Wartoto case), Somare v. Manek (2011) SC1118, Pato v. Manjin [1999] PNGLR 6, Pius Pundi v. Chris Rupen (2015) 5. Section155 (4) of the Constitution has been abused more than its proper use and as the Court has gone on ......
-
Supreme Court Rules - Commentary by Justice Lay
...decision unrevised: Breckwoldt v Gnoyke [1974] PNGLR 106126 (considering the now repealed rules). In Rimbink Pato v Anthony Manjin [1999] PNGLR 6 the court said an applicant for leave must advance "cogent and convincing reasons or exceptional circumstances. There must be clear legal grounds......