BY SAMIE WAIKORI
Government has lost a case dubbed the ‘Dolphin case of 2016’ costing it more than $31 million in compensation.
The High Court ordered government to pay $31,819,591.03 to Ms Christine Anita – daughter of late Dr Baddley Anita, after she won a case filed by her father against the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources (MFMR) and Royal Solomon Islands Police Force back in 2016.
In a High Court order (decision) issued by Justice Augustine Aulanga on September 2, 2025, Ms Christine Anita won the case, while full written reasons (decision) are yet to be handed down.
The orders are as follows;
- The court issued a judgment in favour of Clement Christine Anita (administratrix of Dr. Badley Anita’s estate) against the Attorney General and Royal Solomon Islands Police Force.
- The defendants’ actions on October 29, 2016 were ruled unlawful, arbitrary, and in breach of natural justice.
- Damages of $31,819,591.03 were awarded to the claimant, with 5% annual interest backdated to December 1, 2016.
- The defendants must jointly pay the proceedings’ costs on an indemnity basis due to their rejection of the claimant’s settlement offer.
- The case is scheduled for further mention on October 27 at 9:30 a.m., with the full written reasons for the judgment to be provided later.
Dr Anita, who was the owner of Mammal Dolphin Breeding Centre on Mbungana Island in Central province filed the lawsuit, seeking SBD $31,819,591.03 damages and losses from MFMR and RSIPF, after authorities raided his dolphin facility around October 2016.
Late Dr Anita claimed in the lawsuit that the raid, which resulted in the release of around 27 dolphins from his facility was unlawful and MFMR should compensate the damages and losses incurred on his business.
The MFMR defended its action, cited the Fisheries (prohibition of Export of Dolphin) Regulation 2013 and unlawful capture and caging of dolphins under section 3 of the Fisheries Management Act 2015.
These are the areas charges were laid against Dr Anita, however, in 2018 the High Court has ruled the regulation null and void, and freed late Anita of all these charges.
The High Court found that Dr Anita held a licence legally issued by the Environment Division and Central province to operate the facility.
The programme had been in operation since 2011, aimed at research, aquatic veterinary medicine and captive breeding of dolphin.
Whilst decisions have been made, if the Attorney General’s Chamber doesn’t agree with the compensation, they will go into court assessment to justify the accuracy of the SBD $31,819,591.03 damages or losses of business.
That would be another trial itself, but if AGC agrees that could be the end of the case.
The claimant late Dr Anita was represented by Rano and Company, while the defendants were represented by the Attorney General’s Chamber.
For feedback, contact:[email protected]
