A Tongan-born man, who lost his Fanga property when he became a US citizen, has failed to win his appeal to overturn a Land Court decision.

The appellant was Sifa Pekipaki. The respondents were his niece, Lanuola Fifita, APT Fast Food and the Minister of Lands.

The court heard the appellant was granted the town allotment in 1971 having already built a house on it. However, he was then living in the United States having migrated there in 1970. He married there and had two sons and two daughters and gained his citizenship.

In 1978 his niece, Lanuola Fifita, went to live on the allotment with her family, at the request of her aunt (the appellant's sister), who asked her to look after the allotment, inferentially at the request of the appellant. 

Pekipaki, who became a Tongan national again on September 26, 2016, applied for a regrant of the allotment on September 28 of the same year.

"In our judgment, the findings of the President establish that the Minister's decision was vitiated both by procedural impropriety in that Lanuola was denied natural justice, and by illegality in that the procedure adopted leading to his decision did not comply with the standards required by law."

The President had set aside the grant to the appellant on four grounds, which supported judicial review of the Minister's decision, three of which involved errors of law and two of procedural impropriety. He said the evidence had satisfied him that the Minister's decision went wrong in at least four respects.

First, he failed to make proper and reasonable enquires about material matters. Secondly, and related to the first matter, the Minister failed to observe natural justice as Lanuola was not given a reasonable opportunity to state her views on the material facts or the Minister's reasons for his decision. Thirdly, the Minister's reasons for making his decision were incorrect and based on a mistaken understanding of the facts and, fourthly, he failed to give any consideration to Lanuola's grandson, Kelepi's application for the allotment, he said.

In addition, the Minister's decision was also vitiated because he mistook the law when finding that the appellant remained the holder of the allotment 
until 2008, when the grant was cancelled.