Election Court found no evidence the challenge was frivolous

By Lagi Keresoma/

Apia, Samoa – 06 August 2025: The Electoral Court has found no evidence that the challenge by FAST candidate Leatigaga Matafai Lauina Iiga against HRPP’s Pipi Pauli Tevita Tariu was frivolous or abuse of court process and dismissed Pipi’ application for costs.

Pipi asked for costs when Leatigaga withdrew his challenge against Pipi’s eligibility as a candidate.

After assessing submission by counsels of both candidates, the court ruled in favour of Leatigaga whom they believed had withdrawn his challenge at the first available opportunity.

“There was no evidence that the challenge was frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of the courts processes. Had there been such evidence, then costs for the preparation of a defence may have been awarded,” said His Honour Chief Justice Satiu Simativa Perese.

He also noted that each case will turn on its peculiar facts and in this case, the basis for and timing of the withdrawal appear genuine.

The case
Counsel for Pipi, Fuimaono Sefo Ainu’u complained that his client was required to prepare a statement of defence and this means preparations towards costs for advising the client, drafting a motion of opposition, briefing and deposing eight witnesses, legal research, travel to Savaii and other administrative tasks such as photocopying costs at a rate of $1 per page.

Overall, Fuimaono told the court that he would invoice the client his fees of SAT$8,546, and he seeks from the Court an order that he may recover 85% of that sum, SAT$7,264.10, from the Applicant.

Counsel for Leatigaga Mapusua Tanya Toailoa said the withdrawal of the challenge was in “recognition of the greater good of his community to ensure that there is no conflict within his community. “

The Court also noted that Mapusua had already signalled her client’s intention to withdraw, for the noted reason but was awaiting final instructions.

The court also noted that Mapusua’s advice of her client’s intention to withdraw was given to the Court while Fuimaono was attending on his witnesses in Savaii, and accordingly ahead of Fuimaono filing and serving the affidavits he briefed in Savaii.

The court said that Fuimaono’s request for 85% recovery is unrealistic.

“It is a percentage of recovery that amounts to almost an indemnity of costs and there is no plausible basis for this claim,” said the court.

The court also noted Parliament’s stance that there should be pre-general election challenges.

“These challenges are an integral part of a transparent process of scrutinising and maintaining the integrity of the electoral roll and the eligibility of candidates to stand for election. Costs should therefore never become a barrier to these important principles,” the court noted.