{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f43\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f44\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f46\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f47\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f48\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew){\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f49\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic){\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f50\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f51\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese){\*\falt Times New Roman};}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255;
\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0;
\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*
\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv 
\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\s15\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext15 Style 1;}{\s16\qj \li0\ri0\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\tx720\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext16 Style 4;}{
\s17\qj \li0\ri0\sa288\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\tx720\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext17 Style 5;}{\s18\ql \li0\ri0\sa1080\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar
\tx720\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext18 Style 6;}{\s19\qj \li0\ri0\sa288\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\tx720\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext19 Style 2;}{\s20\qj \li0\ri0\sa360\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\tx720\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext20 
Style 3;}{\s21\ql \li432\ri0\sa936\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin432\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext21 Style 7;}}{\*\latentstyles\lsdstimax156\lsdlockeddef0}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid275343\rsid1328068
\rsid2300668\rsid3957748\rsid5516743\rsid5526961\rsid5715123\rsid6322739\rsid8943152\rsid10649323\rsid11811815\rsid11958184\rsid12939893\rsid14446110\rsid15295404\rsid16674073}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 11.0.5604;}{\info
{\title IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE COOK ISLANDS}{\author ruddley_e}{\operator sam_f}{\creatim\yr2011\mo2\dy1\hr9\min26}{\revtim\yr2011\mo3\dy10\hr10\min36}{\version14}{\edmins52}{\nofpages8}{\nofwords2801}{\nofchars15966}{\*\company scims}
{\nofcharsws18730}{\vern24689}}\paperw11923\paperh16840\margl1174\margr1809\margt2051\margb1620 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\subfontbysize\hyphcaps0\formshade\horzdoc\dghspace120\dgvspace120
\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3\jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot5715123 \fet0\sectd \linex0\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid11958184\sftnbj {\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}
{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}
{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9
\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {
\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE COOK ISLANDS
\par HELD AT RAROTONGA
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 CA 1/09,}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1328068\charrsid10649323  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 2/09 and 3/09
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 IN THE MATTER of Article 60(3) of the Constitution
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 AND
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 IN THE MATTER of Section 391,}{
\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1328068\charrsid10649323  }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 401(a),}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1328068\charrsid10649323  }{
\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 416, 421 & 450 of the Cook Islands Act }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6322739\charrsid10649323 1}{
\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 915 and Sections 9 & 44 }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6322739\charrsid10649323 o}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
f the Judicature Act 1980-81
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 AND
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 IN THE MATTER of the land known as}{
\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1328068\charrsid10649323  }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 TUAREANUI SECTION 40, TAKITUMU
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 BETWEEN
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 ELLENA TAVIONI for and on behalf of the Makea Kopu Ariki
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 Appellant
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 AND
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 JUNE MARGARET BAUDINET of Rarotonga
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 Respondent
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 AND
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 BETWEEN
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 MEREMARAEA VELMA
\par TINIRAU MACQUARIE, retired of Nikao, daughter of the late Makeanui Teremoana Ariki
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 Applicant
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 AND
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 JUNE MARGARET BAUDINET of Rarotonga
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 Respondent
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15295404 {\fs24\insrsid14446110\charrsid15295404 
\par }{\fs24\insrsid1328068\charrsid15295404 Coram:}{\fs24\insrsid2300668\charrsid15295404 \tab }{\fs24\insrsid12939893\charrsid15295404  }{\fs24\insrsid14446110\charrsid15295404 Barker JA (Presiding) }{\fs24\insrsid1328068\charrsid15295404 
\par }{\fs24\insrsid14446110\charrsid15295404 Fisher JA
\par Grice JA}{\fs24\insrsid14446110 
\par }{\fs24\insrsid16674073\charrsid15295404 
\par }{\fs24\insrsid14446110\charrsid15295404 Hearing: }{\fs24\insrsid2300668\charrsid15295404 6 July 2009}{\fs24\insrsid2300668 
\par }{\fs24\insrsid16674073\charrsid15295404 
\par }{\fs24\insrsid14446110\charrsid15295404 Counsel: T Browne for appellant Tavioni 
\par N G}{\fs24\insrsid2300668\charrsid15295404 eorge for appellant MacQuarrie}{\fs24\insrsid14446110\charrsid15295404  
\par R Holmes for respondent}{\fs24\insrsid14446110 
\par }{\fs24\insrsid16674073\charrsid15295404 
\par }{\fs24\insrsid14446110\charrsid15295404 Judgment:}{\fs24\insrsid12939893\charrsid15295404  }{\fs24\insrsid14446110\charrsid15295404 10 July 2009
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5516743 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid16674073 Introduction
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par [1]\tab The two appellants, Ellena Tavioni and Meremaraea MacQuarrie, apply for special leave to appeal against the decision of Hingston J given in the Land Division of the High Court on 8 April 2008. By that decision Hings
ton J determined in favour of the respondent, June Baudinet, certain preliminary matters affecting her application to the High Court to correct or annul an order on investigation of title made by the Land Titles Court on 10 August 1903.
\par 
\par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 Background
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par [2]\tab On 3 June 1903 in the Land Titles Court Judge Gudgeon heard an application for investigation of }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid275343\charrsid10649323 the title to a 53 acre area of l}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 and known as Tuarea Nui Section 40 Takitumu.
\par 
\par [3]\tab At the hearing of t
he application the land was claimed by Makea Takau. There being no objection from others, Judge Gudgeon awarded the land to her, noting in his minute that the land was restricted from sale or lease except by permission of the Court. There is a dispute as 
to whether he also recorded in the minute the further words "a life interest only no power by devise".
\par 
\par [4]\tab Four months later the decision was recorded in a formal order of 10 August 2003. The order was signed by Judge Gudgeon and sealed with the seal of the Court. It did not limit Makea Takao's interest to a life interest.
\par 
\par [5]\tab Over the ensuing hundred years sundry succession orders were made in favour of Makea Takao's descendants. In each case it was assumed that the line }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid275343\charrsid10649323 
of descent from Makea Takau was }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 unrestricted by any life interest.
\par 
\par [6]\tab In 1937 Ngati Raina unsuccessfully challenged the title of Makea Takau's descendants in the High Court. Chief Judge Ayson pointed out that as Ngati Raina did not allege fraud there was no jurisdiction to challenge the 
title. He went on to point out that on the merits, members of the Raina family had been present at the 1903 hearing and had raised no objec}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid275343\charrsid10649323 tion to the award to Makea Takau}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 .
\par 
\par [7]\tab In 1950 Ngati Raina again unsuccessfully challenged the title of Makea Takau's
 descendants, this time in the equivalent of the Court of Appeal. The Court recorded that "The applicants for rehearing set out to show that the Order on Investigation made on 3 June 1903 in favour of Makea Takau was wrong and that if a rehearing were gra
n
ted they could show that the land should have been awarded to those they represent". The Court held that "We have considered this evidence and are satisfied that there is no prospect of the applicants being able to show title before the Native Land Court 
if given the opportunity of doing so. It would take much more than has appeared to shake the }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid275343\charrsid10649323 Makea's title to the }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 land..."
\par 
\par [8]\tab In 2004 the present respondent brought the current proceedings in the Land Division of the High Court on behalf of Ngat
i Raina. This was the family who had applied unsuccessfully in 1937 and again in 1950. The two material remedies sought in the respondent's application were (i) an order correcting the 1903 Order under s 44 of the Judicature Act 1980-81 on the ground that
 
it failed to correctly record the Judge's decision and (ii) an order annulling the 1903 Order under s 391 of the Cook Islands Act 1915 on the ground that it had been obtained by fraud. The application also sought an order for certiorari, and other consequ
ential orders, which have not yet been addressed in the High Court.
\par 
\par [9]\tab Faced with the respondent's application, Hingston J decided three issues which h}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid16674073 e regarded as preliminary ones.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid16674073\charrsid10649323  First}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 , he decided that res judicata did not }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6322739\charrsid10649323 flow from the 1937 and 1950 decisions }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 because "neither section 44 of the Judicature Act 1980-81 or allegations of fraud were before those Courts".
\par 
\par [10]\tab Secondly Hingston J decided that s 44 of the Judicature Act conferred on him the jurisdiction to revisit the 1903 decision and furt
her that he should immediately exercise it. In his view what Judge Gudgeon had really intended in 1903 was that Makea Takau's entitlement would be confined to a life interest. Hingston J directed that the record be amended accordingly.
\par 
\par [11]\tab Thirdly, Hings
ton J considered the respondent's allegation that Makea Takau had obtained the title by fraud. Hingston J did go so far as to accept that Makea Takau was not entitled to take the land and furthermore that in giving it to her Judge Gudgeon knew that she wa
s not entitled to it. Curiously, however, Hingston J considered that as Mrs Baudinet was alleging perjury on Makea Takau's part, and the record did not show whether Makea Takau had been sworn in when she claimed the land, fraud was not established.
\par 
\par [12]\tab Hi
ngston J concluded that "the current records of this block do not reflect the intention of the Court; therefore there is an order that the ownership records in the Court pertaining to this block be amended to accord with this finding." This has been inter
p
reted by counsel as effectively a direction that Judge Gudgeon's order of 10 August 1903 be amended to limit Makea Takao's interest to a life interest with the consequence that when she died she left no interest capable of passing to her descendants. We h
ave approached the appeal on that basis.
\par 
\par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 Special leave to appeal
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par [13]\tab The current appellants, Ellena Tavioni and Meremaraea MacQuarie, claim the land on behalf of their families as descendants of Makea Takau. They seek leave to appeal from Hingston J's de
cision. Both require special leave to appeal pursuant to Art 60(3) of the Constitution.
\par 
\par [14]\tab In the case of Meremaraea MacQuarie, the lack of justification for the delay of nearly a year before filing an appeal would normally be fatal to the application f
or special leave. However in the present case the order of 1903 is one of considerable public importance, affecting as it does so many people who have relied upon it over the last hundred years. In the special circumstances of this case we would not want 
to see a matter with such far-reaching ramifications determined on the technicality that one of the individuals concerned failed to adhere to a procedural time limit. The delay can be recognised when it comes to costs. Special leave to appeal is granted.

\par 
\par [15]\tab 
In the case of Ellena Tavioni, the position is more unusual. As to the delay 10 months before applying for leave to appeal, she points out that she had thought that at first instance she was one of those family members represented at the hearing by Mr 
Manarangi. Mr Manarangi has since filed a memorandum making it clear that the branch of the family that he represented did not include Ms Tavioni or the family branches she represented. It was only when Ms Tavioni learned of Hingston J's decision in Febru
ary of this year that she realised that she needed to initiate her own appeal.
\par 
\par [16]\tab However Mr Holmes submits that quite apart from delay, Ms Tavioni has no standing to appeal as she was not a party to the original proceedings. He cited New Zealand authori
ties in support of the general proposition that only those who were parties to the hearing at first instance have the standing to appeal.
\par 
\par [l7]\tab We do not consider that the New Zealand authorities on standing to appeal apply to a case having the peculiar fe
atures of this one. Whether or not all relevant individuals are specifically named, Cook Islands litigation over family land impacts upon all those family members who have a present or future interest in that land. As a person whose interests were adverse
ly affected by Hingston J's decision, Ms Tavioni was directly involved in the original hearing, whether or not named or formally represented at the original hearing. }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
Makea Nui Ariki v Nooroa Sadaraka Matua}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323  (CA 8/99) 16 November 2001 is authority for permitt
ing a family member to appeal in similar circumstances. Ms Tavioni's misunderstanding over representation at the original hearing was an understandable one given the complexities of the relationships and lines of descent involved. Allowing her a right of 
appeal would not significantly prejudice the respondent given that Meremaraea MacQuarie has been given leave to appeal in any event. For all of those reasons Ms Tavioni is granted special leave to appeal as well.
\par 
\par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 Grounds for appeal
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par [18]\tab The appellants challenge Hingston J's decision on grounds which could be expressed in the following terms:
\par 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 [a] There was no jurisdiction to amend the 1903 court order under s 44 of th}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11811815\charrsid10649323 e Judicature Act given ss 390A(10}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 ) of the Cook Islands Act 1915.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
[b] Even if there would otherwise have been jurisdiction under s 44, the 1937 and 1950 decision meant that the matter was res judicata.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 [c] E}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11811815\charrsid10649323 
ven there had been jurisdiction}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323  under s 44 of the Judicature Act, the respondent had failed to establish the grounds for amendment of the 1903 order on the merits.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par [19]\tab We deal with these in turn.
\par 
\par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 (a) Jurisdiction under s 44
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par [20]\tab Section 44 of the Judicature Act 1980-81 provides:
\par 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 44. }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 Amendments}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11811815\charrsid10649323 \emdash }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
A Judge may at any time amend any minute or judgment of the Court or other record of the Court in order to give effect to the true intent of the Court in respect thereof or truly to record the course of any proceeding.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par [21]\tab The provision is essentially a "slip rule" which permits the Court to correct a failure to accurately record a Judge's intention at the time that he}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3957748\charrsid10649323 
 or she promulgated a decision. }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 In no sense is it a revision of the actual decision. It is merely a clerical correction to ensur}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3957748\charrsid10649323 e}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323  that the decision already made is properly recorded.
\par 
\par [22]\tab In a land law context, the slip rule in s 44 must be read subject to s 390A of the Cook Islands Act 1915.
\par 
\par [23]\tab Section 390A(l) confers on the Chief Justice the power to remedy a mistake, error or omission in an order in certain prescribed circumstances including a situation
 in which the Land Court "by its order has in effect done or left undone something which it did }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3957748\charrsid10649323 n}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
ot actually intend to do or leave undone ...". This too is a slip rule, albeit one which is contained within a provision which includes other grounds for intervention.
\par 
\par [24]\tab However in land matters the slip rule is qualified in two important respects. One is that the power conferred by s 390A can be exercised only by the Chief Justice. It is not a power which can be exercised by other judges. Secondly it can not
 be used to interfere with certain kinds of order. Section 390A(10) provides that:
\par 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
(10) This section shall not apply to any order made upon investigation of title or partition save with regard to the relative interests defined thereunder, but the provisio
ns of this subsection shall not prevent the making of any necessary consequential amendments with regard to partition orders.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par [25]\tab It is not difficult to see why the power to modify land title records has been hedged around with special limitations. Unlik
e most other kinds of court order, an order declaring title to land creates a right in rem. Its impact extends beyond the personal interests of the immediate parties to the litigation. Such orders enure from one generation to the next. Many people will or
d
er their affairs on the strength of the order. Certainty of title is one of the chief objectives of land law. Consistent with that objective, only the Chief Justice can interfere with such orders once they are made, and even he is precluded from doing so 
in the case of orders made upon investigation of title save with regard to the relative interests defined thereunder.
\par 
\par [26]\tab In our view the general slip rule in s 44 of the Judicature Act was not intended to override the specific code for amending Land Cour
t orders in s 390A of the Cook Islands Act. To hold otherwise would be contrary to the priority normally afforded to specifically focused legislation of the latter kind. It would also be contrary to the implied inviolability of orders determining the titl
e to land except in the special circumstances spelled out in s 390A.
\par 
\par [27]\tab The 1903 order in the present case illustrates the reason for s 390A(I0). The order was "an order made upon investigation of title". The amendment sought by the respondent was not on
e with regard to the relative interests defined thereunder. The amendment sought would effectively nullify the order for the purpose of all generations subsequent to Makea Takau. It is too late to suggest that the order as sealed was a mistake. By now man
y generations have relied on it. That is the point of s 390A(10).
\par 
\par [28]\tab We have studied the submissions of Mr Holmes which were prepared with particular care and thoroughness. On this poin
t he argued first that s 44 was not a mere "slip rule". However the wording of s 44 makes it plain that it is confined to a variance between the court's intention and the form in which that intention has been recorded.
\par 
\par [29]\tab Secondly Mr Holmes argued that s 44 was not subject to s 390A(}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid10649323\charrsid10649323 1}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
0). For reasons by now outlined, we are unable to agree.
\par 
\par [30]\tab Thirdly Mr Holmes argued that the decision that mattered was not the sealed order of 10 August 1903 but the antecedent decision of 3 June 1903. In our view the p
oint of reducing a judge's decision to a formal court order is to express the form and wording of the decision in its final form and to remove any room for argument over its authenticity by the formal manner in which it is executed. A formal order is prep
a
red after opportunity for reflection as to its precise wording. As to authenticity, it bears both the seal of the court and the signature of a judge or court official. It is for those reasons that whenever there is variance between an informal note or min
ute of a judge's decision and the formal order in which it is embodied, it is the latter which takes precedence.
\par 
\par [31]\tab In the present case the formal order was the document of 10 August }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid10649323\charrsid10649323 1903. That is the document that }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
has been acted upon ever since. If ther
e were to be a challenge to the 1903 decision, it had to be a challenge to that document, not the informal note made on 3 June 1903. The respondent herself recognised this in her notice of application which was directed to the order, of 10 August 1903, no
t the decision or note of 3 June 1903.
\par 
\par [32]\tab We understand that s 390A(10) was not drawn to the attention of Hingston J. Had he been aware of it he would doubtless have declined to intervene. As he lacked the jurisdiction to amend the order the appeal must be allowed on that ground alone.

\par 
\par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 Res judicata
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par [33]\tab Given our conclusion as to jurisdiction under s 44, the other grounds for appeal can be traversed more briefly.
\par 
\par [34]\tab Ngati Raina had already challenged the validity of the title of Makea Takau and her d
escendants without success in 1937 and in 1950. Without citing authority for this proposition, the Judge thought that res judicata did not apply because "neither section 44 of the Judicature Act 1980-81 or allegations of fraud were before those Courts". H
owever the rule in }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 Henderson v Henderson }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
((1843) 3 Hare 100) is that res judicata embraces not only those matters which a party elected to advance in previous litigation but also those which it could and should have advanced but neglected to do so.
\par 
\par [35]\tab We
 have not been referred to any evidence or argument in support of the respondent's present application that would not have been available to her predecessors in 1937 and 1950. Subject to express statutory exceptions, such as s 390A(10), the courts have al
w
ays had the power to rectify inconsistencies between the decision they intended, and the recorded text, in their own records. Section 44 is merely a recent embodiment of that long-standing power. As to fraud, Hingston J ultimately rejected the allegation 
i
n any event. But the essence of the "fraud" alleged on the part of Makea Takau was no more than the allegation that she claimed land to which she was not legally entitled. That was the very allegation pursued without success in 1937 and 1950. Nor is it an
 allegation of fraud per se. It is merely the allegation that she pursued a claim without legal or customary justification. Res judicata applied.
\par 
\par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 Grounds for rectification
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par [36]\tab The respondent's family have clearly had a long-standing sense of grievance ov
er the events of 1903. By this point we have concluded that the courts have no jurisdiction to inquire into the matter. It is too late to call the order of 10 August 1903 into question.
\par 
\par [37]\tab It may be of some consolation to the family to understand that even if there had been jurisdiction, it is far from clear that as a question of fact, the order of 10 August 1903 fails to reflect the Judge's intention at the time.
\par 
\par [38]\tab Mr Holmes sought to rely upon the surrounding events, and the Judge's journal, to sug
gest that as a matter of inference the Judge must have limited Makea Takau's interest to a life interest on 3 June 1903. However as Mr Holmes ultimately conceded, that conclusion is at least open to serious debate. Mrs Browne provided a possible explanati
on as to how that could have come about. There is some support for her explanation in the spacing and wording of the minute book.\tab The respondent's theory fails to explain why the Judge would sign something so different in the formal order itself.

\par 
\par [39]\tab Had 
it been appropriate for a court to embark upon this factual question over a hundred years later, the onus would have been on the respondent to persuade the court that Judge Gudgeon did not know what he was doing when he signed the order on 10 August 1903.
 After this lapse of time, that would have been a difficult onus to discharge.
\par 
\par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 Conclusion
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par [40]\tab The appeal is allowed. Hingston J's decision of 8 April 2008 was made without jurisdiction. His direction that the order of 10 August 1903 be amended so as to limit Makea Takau's interest to a life interest is quashed.
\par 
\par [41]\tab The respondent is to pay costs of $2500 to the appellant Ellena Tavioni together with disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar.
\par 
\par [42]\tab As between the appellant Meremaraea MacQuarrie and the respondent there will be no order as to costs given the delay in seeking leave to appeal.
\par 
\par SIGNE}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid10649323 D this 10t}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 h day of July 2009
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 Barker JA
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 Fisher JA
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid14446110 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14446110\charrsid10649323 Grice JA
\par }}