A claim by Walter Trading Company Ltd., seeking $360,945 in damages against the Ports Authority was dismissed by Justice Warwick Andrew at the Supreme Court in Nuku'alofa on Friday, February 1.

The claim followed the loss of the Walter Trading's cargo vessel MV Lotoha'angana during cyclone Ami in 2003.

Walter Trading Co. Ltd. is a company owned by Ha'apai People's Representative 'Uliti Uata.

The plaintiff claimed that the MV 'Olovaha, which was moored nearby, dragged its stern anchors and drifted towards the MV Lotoha'angana, and its anchor hooked into the anchor connection of the MV Lotoha'angana, and towed the vessel onto the reef.

Justice Warwick Andrew said in his judgement there was no dispute that the MV Lotoha'angana was completely wrecked during Cyclone Ami on January 14-15 of 2003.

But whether or not the loss of the vessel was entirely the fault of the Ports Authority and whether it acted negligently he did not accept it.

Hazard

Justice Warwick said that prior to Cyclone Ami the MV Lotoha'angana had been berthed at the Faua Wharf, Nuku'alofa, and the Ports Authority regarded it as a hazard. It had been used for fuel storage and additionally it was out of commission and its engines were out of action.

"There is no dispute that the Ports Authority directed the plaintiff to remove the vessel from the wharf. The Plaintiffs refused to cooperate in so removing the vessel. It is well known there is a history of animosity by the plaintiff towards the Authority", the judge added.

The judge also said the plaintiff claimed the value of the vessel to be over $360,000, "but the consensus of expert evidence is that its only value was as scrap and that its highest value could not be greater than NZD$60,000. At the very highest I would assess its value as no higher than TOP$100, 000. The poor near derelict condition of the vessel is confirmed in photographic evidence."

He added that at one stage the Ports Authority offered to buy the vessel for $50,000, as it could have been useful as a barge, the plaintiff agreed but once again there was further delay.

"Finally, in exasperation the Ports Authority removed the vessel and moored it at its facilities in the harbour."

The judge concluded that the mooring system and the mooring of the vessel by the Ports Authority were adequate in the circumstances and there was no negligence to the defendants for the loss of the vessel.

Costs were then awarded to the defendant as agreed or taxed.

Sifa Tu'utafaiva represented the plaintiffs and David Garrett represented the defendant.