Ecolex Logo
El portal del
derecho ambiental
Resultados de la búsqueda » Jurisprudencia

Mayson Nesa vs. Mas Solo Investment Limited

País/Territorio
Islas Salomón
Tipo de la corte
Nacional - corte superior
Fecha
Jul 31, 2019
Fuente
UNEP, InforMEA
Nombre del tribunal
High Court
Juez
Judge John A. Keniapisia
Número de referencia
2019 HSBC 58
Resumen

The claimant sued the defendant in his personal and representative capacity.  In his representative capacity the class action was for and on behalf of 3 villages in Hograno District who allege that the defendant’s logging operations on Gonogano Block B, in which the villages are situated, caused environmental damage thereby affecting the livelihoods of the 3 villages.

The claimant produced an environment assessment report prepared by Robson Hevalao as evidence that there were a number of serious breaches of condition 6 of the felling license which requires the defendant to conduct its operations in a manner that complied with the Revised Solomon Islands Code of Logging Practice.  It was alleged that the defendant intruded into the buffer zones, in particular the Kologara River, where they were conducting their logging activities.  The defendant claimed that the damage was unavoidable and that sanctions and penalties were stipulated under the relevant Forestry and Environment laws and should have been imposed by the State Institutions rather than the claimant.

The Court held that the defendant had failed to comply with standards meant to avoid serious destruction to sensitive ecological parts of the environment and therefore had breached the terms and conditions of its felling license and had also breached its statutory duty of care to avoid operation in the buffer zones.   The claimants had established their claim on duty, breach and harm and the Court found that the defendant owed a duty of care to the 3 villages not to destroy their river and environment like the buffer zones. “So when a statutory duty of care is embodied in a license, it is meant to protect villages and villagers who may be located with the concession land of the forest.” 

The Court awarded damages of $3,2000,000.00 to the Claimants.

Texto completo
58.html
Página web
www.paclii.org