Court chose not to impose sanctions on legal counsel for filing motion against PEC improperly

  11 Nov 2016

By: L.N. Reklai

(Koror, Palau) Trial Division of Palau’s Supreme Court issued a judgment on the Civil Action 16-085, a case filed by Joel Toribiong, Richard Silmai, Ephraim Ngirachitei, Moses Yobech, Israel Demei and Richard Sandei against Palau Election Commission and all other pending claims as moot. [restrict]

In the Order Discharging the Order to Show Cause, where the plaintiff were compelled by court to show reason why they should not have sanctions imposed against them for filing a renewed motion without properly providing the reasonable evidence to support their claims in violation of court rule ROP R. Civ. P.11.

The plaintiff had filed a response to show cause but the court felt that it was not justified. The court declared that the counsel’s representations did violate Rule 11(b)(3).  The court further states that even though the plaintiff’s counsel violated the rule, the court exercised its discretion and will not impose sanctions.

The case relates to a renewed motion filed by Joel Toribiong, Richard Silmai, Ephraim Ngirachitei, Moses Yobech, Israel Demei and Richard Sandei against Palau Election Commission  to compel compliance by Election Commission.  The motion cited many detailed allegations but no supporting evidence of such.  PEC responded with documented support to their argument. The Court ordered the plaintiff to explain why their motion did not follow the court’s rule 11 by providing necessary support for their allegations in their motion.

Plaintiff’s filed their response but as this order states, it did not satisfy the court and is deemed in violation of rule 11 but the court further chose to exercise its right not to impose sanctions. [/restrict]