Arawe Logging Pty Ltd v Thomas Krokio and 30 Others, The Independent State of Papua New Guinea and Minister for Forests [1988–89] PNGLR 216

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Citation: [1988–89] PNGLR 216
• Date: 21 June 1989
• Court: National Court
• Year: 1989

National Court: Brunton J

Judgment Delivered: 21 June 1989

1 Judgment on notice of motion to dissolve interim injunction

___________________________

ARAWE LOGGING PTY LTD AND THOMAS KROKIO AND 30 OTHERS

V

THE INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA AND MINISTER FOR FORESTS

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE—Declaratory relief—Claim against State—Appropriate parties—Proper defendant State rather than Minister.

Held:

Where a person makes a claim against the State seeking declaratory relief, it is sufficient to name the State as defendant without naming a particular Minister, whether by office or in person: the order itself binds the State, its servants or agents.

Cases Cited

The following cases are cited in the reported judgment:

Dent v Kavali [1981] PNGLR 488

Mudge v Secretary for Lands [1985] PNGLR 387.

Motion

This was the hearing of a motion on notice to dissolve an interim injunction.

Brunton AJ: The plaintiffs commenced their action by originating summons filed on 19 May 1989, seeking declarations in relation to a timber rights purchase and a timber permit which had been issued in respect of the Arawe Timber Rights Purchase area, in West New Britain. An amended originating summons was filed on 8 June 1989. By notice of motion dated 19 May 1989 the plaintiffs sought ex parte injunctions against the first and second defendants from dealing in any way with the timber resource under dispute. The same day Andrew AJ made orders that the State was to be restrained from granting or issuing a timber permit to any company, person or entity other than the first plaintiff until the return date of the order. The first and/or second defendants were to be restrained from entering into negotiations or dealing in any way with a proposed contractor or the servants or agents of any proposed contractor and in particular with a company called Cakara Alam (PNG) Pty Ltd until the return date of the order. The service of the order was to be substituted and effected on the first and second defendants by service on the Secretary for Department of Forests or the Secretary for Justice. The order was returnable before the court on 2 June 1989 at 9.30 am. By notice of motion on 30 May 1989 the State and the Minister for Forests sought to dissolve the ex parte interim injunction ordered by Andrew AJ. Further, the defendants sought to dismiss the whole of the proceedings including the injunction and the originating summons and they sought costs. On 2 June, by consent, the matter was stood over to a chambers hearing on 9 June 1989, and directions were made that the evidence–in–chief of the parties be reduced to affidavit form, and be filed before 13 June; that affidavits in reply be filed before 20 June; that each party was to give notice to the other party of those deponents required for cross–examination before 16 June, and that the hearing of the matter was to commence on 21 June. Each party was at liberty to apply on three days notice; the injunctions granted on 19 May 1989 and continued on 2 June 1989 were to be continued until the hearing of the action.

[His Honour then considered in a manner...