The claimant sought for the Court to restrain the company SPI Sandalwood Vanuatu, the fourth defendant, from exporting, processing, purchasing, harvesting any Sandalwood or sandalwood products or any other forest products pursuant to its license until further order. The first, second and third defendants were government authorities involved in the licensing and the Government of Vanuatu.

Prior to these proceedings, there had been several others before the Supreme Court. The first one called for the license of the company to be quashed, as it was contrary to the decision of the Council of Ministers to reserve all involvement in sandalwood operations to Ni-Vanuatu custom landowners. The next case concerned a prohibition of the export of sandalwood. Also in the third case the claimant asked for a license to be quashed and for the Court to declare that the decision had not been a decision aimed at sustainably managing, developing or protecting the sandalwood resource.

The Court was of the opinion that it was clear that the first, second and third defendants had made decisions contravening the decision to reserve Sandalwood operations to Ni-Vanuatu custom landowners and that they had failed to take into account Section 4 of the Forestry Act. Therefore the fourth defendant was restrained from exporting, processing, purchasing, harvesting or otherwise acquiring howsoever any sandalwood or sandalwood products or any other forestry products pursuant to the license in order to protect the industry and the resource itself.