The High Court in Lautoka has dismissed a civil case filed by a retiree from Sigatoka against the Fiji Police Force, determining that the claims did not comply with essential legal standards. Peter Geoffrey Rae, a resident of Korotogo backroad, lodged a writ of summons on February 28, 2024, seeking a court order for restitution and $3 million in damages.
In his suit, Rae accused the police of failing to properly investigate a complaint that led to his arrest and claimed violations of his constitutional rights, including the failure to present him in court within 48 hours. He further alleged that his right to be presumed innocent and to humane treatment while in custody had been infringed.
Additionally, Rae sought damages for health and mental trauma, the dissolution of his marriage, loss of access to his children, and the collapse of his business, which he attributed to the police’s actions. His claim also included a request for the restitution of property valued at $14,030, which encompassed various items such as 30 kilograms of dried yaqona, surfboards, a Nikon camera, and household goods.
In response, Ms. J Raman, representing the Fiji Police Force, filed a motion to strike out the writ, stating that it lacked a concise overview of the claim, failed to establish a legal foundation, and did not specify the factual basis for the allegations.
Rae contended that dismissing his case would contradict the interests of justice and requested a chance to revise his statement of claim. However, the court pointed out that no formal statement of claim had been submitted in the case.
In a ruling on February 6, Master Preetika Prasad determined that Rae’s claim did not present a reasonable cause of action. The court found that Rae’s submission lacked essential facts and details to substantiate how the police had violated his rights and how such violations led to his claimed damages. Additionally, the court noted that instead of requesting more time to file the appropriate documents, Rae had sought a default judgment, which the judge considered an abuse of the legal process.
Consequently, the writ of summons was struck out, and the court ruled that there would be no order for costs. This outcome underscores the importance of adhering to established legal protocols when pursuing civil claims.