Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Reports of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands

  Download original PDF

Anjouij v Wame [1971] TTLawRp 15; 5 TTR 337 (28 May 1971)

5 TTR 337

FRANK ANJOUIJ, Plaintiff

v.

WAME, as successor to LANJO, and MAIKEL, Defendants

Civil Action No. 338

Trial Division of the High Court

Marshall Islands District

May 28, 1971

Action to determine rights on Jidrakinej Wato, Mejit Island, Marshall Islands. The Trial Division of the High Court, D. Kelly Turner, Associate Justice, held that the land in question was not given as tolemour but rather was kotra land and as such plaintiff had no right to it but rather use rights were given to the iroij lablab.

1. Marshalls Land Law-"Tolemour"

Tolemour is land given to a commoner for successful services in nursing an iroij.

2. Marshalls Land Law-"Tolemour"

Tolemour is not mentioned in connection with jikin in kokabit, land used as a special place in which to give magical medical treatment.

3. Marshalls Land Law -"Koran" Lands-Generally

Kotra lands are solely owned by the iroij and include not only the iroij rights but also exclusive alab and dri jerbal interests.

4. Marshalls Land Law-"Kotra" Lands- Use Rights

An iroij may, and usually does, assign someone to work kotra lands for him compensating the worker with the dri jerbal sharp.

5. Marhsalls Land Law-"Kotra" Lands-Use Rights

An iroij may give kotra land away or assign workers to it and a successor iroij may appoint new workers and is not bound to continue workers on the land previously appointed, although it is acknowledged that in compliance with general custom, a worker should not be removed without goon cause.

6. Marshalls Land Law-'"Kotra" Lands-Use Rights

Where land in question was kotra land and not given as tolemour, the dri jerbal assignments made by a succession of iroij lablab excluded an interest of plaintiff who claimed lands as descendant of one who had received land as tolemour.

TURNER, Associate Justice

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Jidrakinej Wato, Mejit Island, Marshall Islands, is kotra land, so-called in the Radak Chain and called mo in the Relik Chain.

2. Jidrakinej was not given by Takalur as tolemour to plaintiff's grandmother, Lijutok.

3. Lanjo, now deceased, was the last iroij lablab and whether Warne is his successor was not considered and is not determined.

4. Any claim plaintiff may have had to dri jerbal rights were lost when Lakiwa, successor iroij lablab to Takalur, removed Lokle from the land. Lokle was successor dri jerbal to his wife, Lijutok.

OPINION

The judgment in this case depends upon the determination of the classification of the land in question as to whether it was given as tolemour or whether it was and is kotra.

[1, 2] Tolemour is land given to a commoner for successful services in nursing an iroij. There was evidence Lijutok did nurse Takalur but that it was not successful and that he went to Jaluit for medical treatment. In any event, the land was given to Lijutok, according to the plaintiff said, because Lijutok employed magic to protect Takalur from punishment because he fought with and wounded another man. The court has been unable to confirm that under Marshallese custom land is given as tolemour for employment of magic in lieu of nursing services. Tolemour is not mentioned in connection with jikin in kokabit, land used as a special place in which to give magical medical treatment, described by Jack A. Tobin in Land Tenure Patterns, page 59.

[3-5] The evidence is quite conclusive that this wato was kotra land. Kotra lands are soley owned by the iroij and includes not only the iroij rights but also exclusive alab and dri jerbal interests. The iroij may, and usually does, assign someone to work the land for him compensating the worker with the dri jerbal share. The iroij may give the land away or assign workers to it. A successor iroij may appoint new workers and is not bound to continue iroij may appoint new workers and is not bound to continue workers on the land previously appointed, although it is acknowledged that in compliance with general custom, a worker should not be removed without good cause. As to the general rule, see Limine v. Lainej, 1 T.R.R. 107 at 111.

Kotra or mo lands are discussed in Land Tenure Patterns, pages 57, 58. As a sidelight, the assessor in this case, Presiding Judge Kabua Kabua, who is an iroij lablab, holds nineteen parcels of kotra lands.

[6] It is evident in this case that Takalur, who held the land as kotra and also lived on it, assigned Lijutok to work on it. When Lijutok died, her husband Lokle continued working under authority of the successor iroij lablab, Lakiwa. During Lakiwa's tenure, Lokle got in trouble in connection with the iroij share of copra and was cut off from the land. Kotral was assigned to the land after Lokle. Takinej, successor iroij lablab to Lakiwa, assigned Jerilon and Nema to the land. Lanjo succeeded Takinej and he assigned Jamloj until Maikel took over the land and Warne was then assigned to the land by Lanjo. This series of dri jerbal assignments clearly excludes any interest of plaintiff Frank.

Wame now claims to be the successor iroij lalab. Granted that it is in the interest of all concerned for the successor iroij to Lanjo to be quickly determined, Lainlij v. Lajoun, 1 T.T.R. 113 at 117, 118, this case cannot resolve that question because no evidence was heard on the point except Warne's assertion that he was the successor. Maikel, who may or may not be a claimant of the title, did not appear, although named as a defendant. This question of succession also is raised in other recent decisions. Lijon Ishoda v. Bellu Jejon, Civil Action No. 381, and Wame v. Bellu, Civil Action No. 358. If the parties themselves cannot settle the question of succession, this court will consider the matter when it is asked to make a decision and all claimants are present to support their claims. Until that time we decline to rule on the successorship to Lanjo and such ruling is not required in the disposal of plaintiffs claim in this case.

Ordered, adjudged and decreed:-

1. That the plaintiff holds no right, title or interest in Jidrakinej Wato, Mejit Island.

2. That the wato is kotra land and therefore all interests attached to it are solely held by the successor to iroij lablab Lanjo, deceased, when the successorship is finally determined.