Don Pomb Pullie Polye v Jimson Sauk Papaki and Electoral Commission of Papua New Guinea (2000) SC651

JurisdictionPapua New Guinea
CourtSupreme Court
Citation[2000] PNGLR 166
Date31 May 2000
Year2000

Full Title: Don Pomb Pullie Polye v Jimson Sauk Papaki and Electoral Commission of Papua New Guinea (2000) SC651

Supreme Court: Sheehan J, Jalina J, Sawong J

Judgment Delivered: 31 May 2000

1 Practice and procedure—Costs—Application was an abuse of process and hopeless—Discretion of Court—liability of Counsel for costs wasted or thrown away.

2 Supreme Court Act (Ch37) s35 anomalous and reflects an error in drafting

3 Myers v Elman [1940] AC 282, Holden & Co v Crown Prosecution Service [1990] 2 QB 261, Ridehalgh v Horsefield [1994] 3 All ER 848, Orchard v Southeastern Electricity Board [1987] QB 565 referred to

4 National Court Rules, O22 r65, Supreme Court Act (Ch37), s8(1)(e), s35

Cases cited:

Myers v Elman [1940] AC 282; Holden & Co v Crown Prosecution Service [1990] 2 QB 261; Ridehalgh v Horsefield [1994] 3 All ER 848; Orchard v Southeastern Electricity Board [1987] QB 565

___________________________

By the Court: On 29 October 1999 this Court in its supervisory jurisdiction of judicial review ruled that an election petition brought by the First Respondent in the National Court be dismissed as the Respondent Petitioner was without standing. Because he was not registered on the Electoral Roll for the Kandep Electorate he was not entitled to vote in the election nor was he eligible to stand as a candidate for the electorate nor to bring an election petition challenging the result of the election in that electorate in the name of a person not on electoral roll.

On 5 November 1999 application was made to this Court for the review to be relisted for “the purpose of correcting perceived mistakes in the judgment and orders . . . due to a misapprehension by this Court of facts and or law and for the purpose of reversing its decision and reinstating the decision of the National Court”.

When the matter was called...

To continue reading

Request your trial
24 practice notes
23 cases
1 provisions
  • Supreme Court Rules - Commentary by Justice Lay
    • Papua New Guinea
    • Papua New Guinea Legislation
    • 1 January 2009
    ...SC718. There is no stipulation in the rules that an Application for Leave to Appeal be served: Don Pomb Polye v Simpson Sauk Papaki [2000] PNGLR 166. Interlocutory Order. For cases on what is an interlocutory order see the commentary to the Supreme Court Act s Rule 5 Once leave is granted O......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT