The Land and Titles Court's decision to evict villagers of Leauvaa has been stayed until an appeal is heard in the L.T.C. Appeal and Review Court, which is yet to be established.

In addition to halting any eviction sought by Afega, the village of Leauvaa was told not to take any further steps to develop the land in dispute beyond the regeneration of crops. 

The Supreme Court delivered its decision on Friday afternoon to “preserve the current situation until there can be an orderly resolution of the dispute according to law.” 

Chief Justice Satiu Simativa Perese sitting alongside Justice Niava Mata Tuatagaloa and Justice William Young handed down the decision in a crowded courtroom. 

The dispute between the villages concerns land currently occupied by the people of Leauva'a but is owned by Afega. 

Afega is seeking the eviction of the Leauva'a people from this land.

Over the last 70 years, the dispute has been much litigated before the Land and Titles Court. 

Judicial review proceedings of recent LTC judgments were before the court and involve constitutional and jurisdictional arguments revolving around amendments to the Constitution effected by the Constitution Amendment Act 2000 (CAA  2020') and the Land and Titles Act 2000 (LTA 2020).

The panel of judges decided to deal first with the constitutional and jurisdictional arguments, leaving the merits of the judicial review complaints to be dealt with later.

As a result, the core points of dispute between Afega and Leauva'a were not the subject of much argument from counsels, said the court. 

The three main areas of dispute are that the land is indisputably owned by Afega. 

There are, however, some 128 acres of land on which Leauva'a has registered title Lots 29 and Lot 30. 

Afega does not accept that Leauva'a owns this land. 

A 2017 decision of the appellate division of the LTC set aside an eviction order against those occupying the land claimed by Afega.

 Leauva'a said this decision must be treated as final because of section 70 of the LTA 1981 and in any event, created a res judicata against Afega subsequently seeking eviction. 

This argument from Leauvaa has been squarely addressed and rejected in judgments of the LTC

 Leauva'a argue that in any event eviction orders were not appropriate. 

The current decisions within the Land and Titles Court system concerning all areas of dispute have been adverse to Leauva'a. 

But Leauva'a has an appeal before the Land and Titles Court of Appeal and Review [LTCAR] (a court legally established by the CAA 2020) in which it seeks to challenge these decisions. 

However, the Supreme Court was satisfied that the non-establishment of the LTCAR creates a gap in the legislative (and constitutional) scheme.

The court noted LTC does not have the power to enforce its own decisions. 

This was the conclusion reached by Sapolu CJ in relation to the LTA 1981 in Meredith Ainuu Lawyers v Muagutagata Ah Him. 

Therefore the Supreme Court said eviction of the Leauva'a people can only lawfully be achieved under orders made in either the District Court or Supreme Court under section 59 of the LTA 2020. 

It pointed out that attempts to evict Leauva'a people from the disputed land would breach section 45 of the Crimes Act and can only be effected under enforcement orders in the District Court or Supreme Court. 

The court said the effect of this judgment is that such enforcement orders will not be made and such eviction would breach rights that Leauva'a claims, which have not yet been finally disposed of in the Land and Titles Court system. 

The Court granted orders to stay the execution of the judgments of the Land and Titles Court in 2018, the Land and Titles High Court on 24 March 2023 and the Land and Titles First Court on 8 March 2024. 

“This is pending the establishment of the Land and Titles Court of Appeal and Review and its determination of Leauva'a's appeal. 

“The second respondents are enjoined from taking any steps to evict those occupying the land in issue in these proceedings (meaning the intermediate land and lots 29 and 30; such order to subsist unless or until eviction orders are obtained in the District Court or Supreme Court.”

The Court also made additional comments that its judgement “is very much of a holding nature, preserving the current situation until there can be an orderly resolution of the dispute according to law”. 

“As a corollary of that, we think it would not be appropriate, pending that resolution, for Leauva'a to take any steps to develop the land in dispute beyond the regeneration of their crops that were destroyed by the earlier eviction attempts. 

“Any issues as to this can be resolved by application under the leave to apply that is reserved in the formal orders of the Court.”

The judges said they recognise that the judgment may have implications in relation to the many other cases that are awaiting a hearing in the LTCAR. 

“We see no point in trying to resolve those implications at this time. However, the obvious potential further complex and perhaps controversial litigation emphasises the importance of that court being set up as soon as possible.”

The government has proposed amendments to establish an interim L.T.C. Court of Appeal to deal with appeals already lodged and move to disestablish the LTCAR once those appeals are dealt with. 

The consultation on those amendments is currently on foot.