Wawoi Guavi Timber Company Limited and Papua New Guinea Forest Authority v Ken Norae Mondia and PNG Eco Forestry Forum Inc and John Danaiya for Himself and on behalf of the Kuyule Netene and Debele Clans of the Kasua Tribe (2007) SC1028

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Court: Supreme Court
• Date: 16 October 2007
• Citation: (2007) SC1028
• Docket Number: SCA NO. 22 OF 2007
• Year: 2007

Full Title: SCA NO. 22 OF 2007; Wawoi Guavi Timber Company Limited and Papua New Guinea Forest Authority v Ken Norae Mondia and PNG Eco Forestry Forum Inc and John Danaiya for Himself and on behalf of the Kuyule Netene and Debele Clans of the Kasua Tribe (2007) SC1028

Supreme Court: Injia, CJ

Judgment Delivered: 16 October 2007

SUPREME COURT—appeal—application for leave to appeal from an interlocutory judgment granting leave to apply for judicial review—leave to appeal against grant of leave for judicial review necessary—whether applicant has shown there is prima facie case or an arguable case—no apparent or patent error shown in the manner in which the trial judge exercised his discretion on leave—application dismissed with costs to the respondents - s14 Supreme Court Act, O16 r3 National Court Rules

Cases Cited:

Papua New Guinea Cases

Paul Asakusa v Andrew Kumbakor; (2) Paul Asakusa v National Housing Corporation Board; (3) Paul Asakusa v Andrew Kumbakor (2009) N3303; Andrew Baing v PNG National Stevedores Pty Ltd (2000) SC627; Boyepe Pere v Ningi [2003] PNGLR 58; Breckwoldt v Gnoyke [1974] PNGLR 106; Don Pomb Polye v Jimson Sauk Papaki [2000] PNGLR 166; Garamut Enterprises Ltd v Steamships Trading Company Ltd (1999) SC625; Ila Geno, Paul Lawton and Florien Mambu v The Independent State of Papua New Guinea [1993] PNGLR 22; Island Helicopter Services Ltd v Wilson Sagati (2008) N3340; Dr Rose Kekedo v Burns Philp (PNG) Ltd [1988–89] PNGLR 122; Matiabe Oberia v Chief Inspector Michael Charlie (2005) SC801; Olasco Niugini Pty Ltd v John Kaputin [1986] PNGLR 244; Peter Peipul v Pila Niningi, Unpublished judgment in SCR No. 89 of 1988 delivered on 8th May; Sir Julius Chan v The Ombudsman Commission of Papua New Guinea [1999] PNGLR 240; Rimbink Pato v Anthony Manjin [1999] PNGLR 6; William Moses v Otto Benal Magiten (2006) SC875

Overseas cases

Inland Revenue Commissioners; Ex parte National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Businesses Ltd [1981] 2 WLR 722

1. INJIA, CJ: This is an application for leave to appeal from an interlocutory judgment given by the National Court on 16 March 2007 in proceedings OS (JR) 259 of 2006 in which the Court granted the respondents leave to apply for judicial review under O16 r3 of the National Court Rules (NCR). Leave to appeal under s14 of the Supreme Court Act is necessary to appeal against grant of leave for judicial review: Garamut Enterprises Ltd v Steamships Trading Company Ltd (1999) SC625.

2. The application is supported by several affidavits. The respondents contest the application. They rely on several affidavits. I have considered those affidavits and the submissions made by counsel representing the parties.

3. There is no contest on the relevant principles on grant of leave to appeal. I remind my self of the principles on grant of leave. The grant or refusal of leave to appeal is of course discretionary. The main test is whether the applicant has shown that there is a prima facie case or an arguable case that the decision was wrong and that substantial injustice will be done by leaving the erroneous decision un-revisited or unrevised on appeal. The Court is not determining the merits of the appeal itself. It will suffice if the Court is persuaded that the proposed appeal raises issues of law or mixed fact and law which are fairly arguable and require...