Safari Lodge (Fiji) Ltd v Tiki (Fiji) Ltd Pays/Territoire Fidji Type de cour Nationale - cour supérieure Date Jul 10, 2014 Source UNEP, InforMEA Nom du tribunal High Court Siège de la cour Lautoka Juge A. TUILEVUKA Numéro de référence Civil Action No.: HBC 226 of 2013 Langue Anglais Sujet Environnement gén. Mot clé Tourisme Résumé The case concerned a coastal engineering project, including dredging and excavation work, and resulting spoils, which were claimed to be a public nuisance. The plaintiffs, Safari Lodge and Warren Francis, the managing director of Safari Lodge, claimed that the defendants had caused the negative effects and sued them for damages as well as pleaded a cause of action under the Environment Management Act 2005. The defendants were The Tiki Ltd, its managing director Michael Harvey and the Ministry of Lands and Mineral Resources and the Department of Environment.The defendant carried out certain excavation and construction works. The Court found no evidence to suggest that the works had been approved by the Department of Lands. According to the plaintiff coral had been damaged and the beach cut in half resulting in erosion of the seashore. The defendant also claimed that a lot of spoil had resulted from the dredging and excavation. He also claimed that the sea had been polluted and structures reducing the quality of the surroundings constructed. The defendant lastly pointed out that the various government departments were aware of the works. The plaintiff meant that the acts specified above did not only harm the environment itself, but also locals of the surrounding villages and the guests at his resort. Due to the latter, he claimed to be awarded damages.As there was a risk of the defendants moving their assets abroad, a mareva injunction had previously been granted. A question in the case was whether this injunction should continue as an interim injunction.The Court established that the plaintiffs had established a good arguable case. Thus the Court concluded that the mareva injunction previously granted should continue until further orders of the Court. Texte intégral Safari Lodge (Fiji) Ltd v Tiki (Fiji) Ltd.pdf