A dispute over land to determine the legal order of succession of a man who died “intestate” without a will, was heard at the Nuku’alofa Land Court on 26-27 July 2021 by Justice Niu and Assessor Tu‘ifua. Although different family members had applied for it, the land had reverted to the Crown, and had been re-allocated, while the claims were not lawfully resolved.

On 4 October 2021, Justice Niu made the following orders:

1. The first defendant Minister of Land, shall forthwith cancel the deed of grant book 433 fokio 58 in the name of the second defendant, Filimoto Makameone Taumoepeau.
2. The Plaintiff, Siosifa Taumoepeau, shall forthwith take appropriate steps to apply for letters of administration, subject to approval thereof by the Minister of Justice, in respect of the estate of Matei Taumoepeau.
3. Upon grant of letters of administration, and ascertaining ownership of the two remaining houses on the allotment, the Minister of Lands shall invite the plaintiff, the second defendant and Mapili To‘a, and any other person who may wish to apply for the allotment, to attend before him and make representations to be granted the allotment, and he shall hear and decide their applications in accordance with the principles of natural justice.
4. The defendants shall jointly a severally pay the costs of the plaintiff, to be taxed if not agreed.

The dispute followed the death of Matei Taumoepeau, the owner of a 1 rood 24.2 perches town allotment at Kolofo‘ou, Nuku‘alofa, passed away on 6 November 2005.

Matei neither had a legitimate son, nor officially allocated his Nuku’alofa property to his adopted son, Dr Filimone Makameone Taumoepeau (Maka) who had used the property for his mortuary and clinic business.

The Plaintiff, Siosifa Moala Taumoepeau (Jnr), is a cousin of Maka.

The late Matei Taumoepeau had three younger brothers, Fakava‘inga, ‘Onehunga and ‘Alekisanita, and one older brother Siosifa (Snr), each of whom held his own town allotment.

The eldest brother Siosifa (Snr) had an illegitimate son, Maka (the second defendant). Maka was adopted by the second brother, Matei.

The third brother, Fakava‘inga had three sons, Paula, Siosifa (the Plaintiff) and ‘Alekisanita, and none of them had a town allotment in Nuku‘alofa. Fakava'inga had his own town allotment, which transferred to his widow, and she still holds it until now.

Siosifa (Jnr) brought the case in the Land Court against the defendants, the Hon. Minister of Lands and Maka, the adopted son of Matei.

Siosifa claimed that he was the rightful heir to the town allotment of his uncle and he had claimed it in writing within 12 months after the death of his uncle in 2005, but the Minister of Lands, the first defendant had granted the town allotment unlawfully to another person, Mapili To‘a.

The Land Minister Ma’afu signed his consent to the grant, as estate holder, on 29 April 2011 and he registered Mapili’s grant on 7 June 2011.

Mapili was the grandson of the older brother of the holder of the allotment, of which the allotment had formed part.

It was cancelled by order of the Land Court in 2015 and again unlawfully granted to the second defendant Maka in 2016.

Maka, the second defendant, lodged his claim as the heir to Matei’s allotment with the Ministry of Lands Office on 20 December 2005. Then on 1 August 2006 he lodged his application to be granted the allotment with the Land Office.

Heir to the allotment

On 15 September 2006 Paula, the eldest son of Fakava‘inga wrote to the Land Registrar of the Ministry of Lands and applied for Matei’s allotment be registered to his brother, Siosifa (Jnr).

However, according to Justice Niu, even though Paula signed the letter dated 15 September 2006 and it was taken by Siosifa to the Land Registrar, it was not a claim by or for the heir, Paula, and it was therefore not a proper claim for the purpose of S.87 of the Land Act. Accordingly, the allotment reverted on the expiry of 12 months from Matei’s death.

“As to whether Paula was or is the heir to the allotment, upon the death of Matei, the answer is that he was,” said Justice Niu.

“That means that the eldest brother of Matei, Siosifa Snr, would have been the heir had he not died in 1960, and as he had no legitimate son, the next according to the Land Act S.82 (e) “if the deceased holder’s eldest brother be dead without leaving any heir male of his body then the holder’s next eldest brother shall succeed or if he be dead the eldest male heir of his body . . .”

“Because the next eldest brother of Matei was Fakava’inga and Fakava’inga had already died in 2003, his eldest son, Paula, was therefore the heir.

“Paula has no children, but his brother Siosifa has three sons and three daughters and Paula on 15 September 2006 wrote to the Land Registrar and applied that Matei’s allotment be registered in his brother Siosifa.”

The claim of the plaintiff, Siosifa Moala Taumoepeau was filed on 16 November 2020.

Why did allotment revert to the Crown?

According to Justice Niu, the allotment was reverted to the Crown because the lawful heir to the allotment, Paula, the eldest son of Fakava’inga did not claim it as heir, instead he claimed it for his next brother, Siosifa, the plaintiff.

So though Paula signed the letter, dated 15 September 2006 and was taken by Siosifa to the Land Registrar of the Ministry of Lands, it was not a claim by or for the heir, Paula, and it was therefore not a proper claim for the purpose of S.87 of the Land Act.

Accordingly, the allotment reverted on the expiry of 12 months from Matei's death.

However, the judge found that the advice given to the Minister by Maka's counsel at the time, had wrongfully excluded Siosifa (Jnr) from the claim, and the Minister' had accepted the advice without independent advice from the Solicitor General.

“I have therefore come to the conclusion, for the foregoing reasons, that the grant which the first defendant Minister to the second defendant, Maka, of the town allotment of Matei was unlawful because it was made in breach of natural justice in that - 


1. The Minister wrongfully excluded the plaintiff, Sifa, from being an applicant for the allotment, and thereby denied him the right to make representation to him and/or disregarded any representation which he had made; and
2. The Minister failed to consider and to ascertain a relevant factor, namely, the ownership of the three houses which were on the allotment at the time.

The judge made his orders to cancel the deed in the name of Filimoto Makameone Taumoepeau and for the plaintiff to take appropriate steps to apply for letters of administration subject to the approval of the Minister of Justice in respect of the estate.

He ordered that the Minister of Lands shall invite the plaintiff, the second defendant and Mapili To‘a, and any other person who may wish to apply for the allotment, to attend before him and make representations to be granted the allotment, and he shall hear and decide their applications in accordance with the principles of natural justice.