Supreme Court
DECISION
1. On 20 November 2024, the Applicant, Taut Lorenzo filed his application for letters of Administration of the estate of the deceased, his father, late Louis Paul Taut. The Application was filed with a sworn statement of the Applicant in support.
2. On 25 November 2025 Orders were issued for the Applicant to provide additional information as follows: -
“
1) That the Applicant to cause an advertisement to be broadcast on the radio in Bislama on three (3) days of the same week at least once in a morning and once in an evening in accordance with the Rules;
2) That the applicant retain the liberty to take all additional actions necessary to bring the Application to the attention of all who may have an interest in the deceased estate.
3) That the Applicant to file before the next hearing a sworn statement attaching notice of advertisement and receipt of payment to show proof of languages, dates and times of broadcast.”
3. The matter was given a review date without a hearing for 29 January 2025. These orders were forwarded by the Office of the Deputy Master to Counsel via email on 26 November 2024. Following the review on 29 January 2025, the Applicant had not complied with the orders therefore same orders were re-issued. The Applicant was informed that a further review without hearing was listed for 26 February 2025.Thes orders were again forwarded to Counsel via email by the Office of the Deputy Master on 30 January 2025.
4. At the review on the 26 February 2025, the Applicant had still not complied with the 29 January orders and the same orders were re-issued again. The Applicant was informed that a further review without hearing was listed for 26 March 2025.These orders were also emailed to counsel by the Office of the Deputy master on 26 February 2025.
5. At the review on the 26 March 2025, it was noted that the Applicant had for three (3) months consistently failed to comply with the original orders issued on 25 November 2024.The Applicant was then ordered to appear at the next hearing to show cause why the Application for letters of Administration should not be struck out. The matter was listed for a rule 9 .10 hearing on 22 April 2025 at 2pm. That hearing did not proceed and was relisted to today.
6. At the hearing this morning Counsel was informed that the Applicant had to show cause why the matter should not be struck for non compliance with the previous orders. Counsel confirmed receiving the orders sent by the Office of the Deputy Master and that he had informed the Applicant but no steps were taken by the Applicant to comply.
7. To date there has been no compliance with those orders and the Applicant has not shown cause why the matter should not be struck out.
Result
8. Having heard from Counsel and considering rule 9.10 (3) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the matter is now struck.
DATED at Port Vila this 11th day of July, 2025
BY THE COURT
………………………
Dudley Aru
Judge