The claimant, Kwila Limited, conducted reclamation and development works in order to re-establish the Ewanesu Island. Prior to the start of the project, the claimant acquired a commercial/tourism lease over the remnants of the island and also a ministerial consent to undertake reclamation and rehabilitation work. An environmental impact assessment was attached to the application, but there was no detail plans for the development as required. The claimant then commenced reclamation and excavation works, but the workers were stopped by the defendant who meant that the works constituted an intrusion and trespass onto his land.

The defendant denied trespass and counterclaimed for damages for the claimant’s alleged trespass and also for the destruction of trees and mangroves.

The Court concluded that the claimant had exceeded it’s permission granted in its foreshore development consent when it initiated the excavation work which was not included. Moreover, the Court stated that the defendant’s lease title included that mangroves area beyond the claimant’s excavation.

Finally the Court turned to the issue of damages. It was clear that the defendant had lost access to the mangrove area and the direct access to a nearby lagoon. The defendant also lost a large amount of soil that was excavated during the dredging works and now replaced by water.

It was also clear, from the claimant’s own environmental impact assessment, that the removal of the mangroves affected the marine habitat and breeding grounds for marine and coastal fisheries. It was there also stated that mangroves should be protected to ensure their sustainability and that that the sensitive ecosystem could be affected.

The defendant was awarded damages for both the damages to his property and to the nature and fisheries resources.