[29ASR2d107]
v.
High
Court of
Trial
Division
CA
No. 43-95
[1] Any lease of communal land not
submitted to the governor for approval is void.
[2] It is the policy of this court to
encourage the submission of leases for communal land to the governor for
approval. The court will not imply
validity of a lease of communal land not submitted to the governor for
approval.
Before KRUSE, Chief Justice, AFUOLA,
Associate Judge, and BETHAM, Associate Judge
Counsel: For
Plaintiff, Afoa Moega Lutu
For Defendant, Asaua Fuimaono
Order
Granting Petition for Summary Eviction:
On
On
[1] Regardless of any claims
made under the lease by either party, the lease is void. A.S.C.A. § 37.0221 provides
that any lease of communal land "shall be submitted . . . to the Governor
for approval, and it shall have no validity until such approval has been
signified in writing."
[2] It is the policy
of this court to encourage the submission of leases for communal land to the
governor for approval. See, e.g., Sagapolutele v. Tala`i, 20 A.S.R. 2d 16 (Land & Titles Div. 1991). The law is that leases not properly submitted
shall have no validity. We will not
imply validity where it is explicitly denied by statute. Thus, neither party has any right under the
invalid lease. Lavata`i's
petition for summary eviction will, therefore, be
granted.
The issues of unjust enrichment
(compensation for the value of good faith improvements made to land) raised by
the defendant will not be decided in this summary proceeding, but must be
considered at trial. We need not
determine the unjust enrichment issue to rule on the petition to recover
possession of premises by summary proceedings.
See A.S.C.A. § 43.1411.
For reasons given, judgment for
possession, pursuant to A.S.C.A. § 43.1412, will enter in favor of plaintiff Lavata`i, without prejudice to any counterclaims that Pu`efua may have.
It is so ordered.
********