Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.


At the KM. Court yesterday, Mr. O’Reilly, on notice, applied for a re-hear-ing in this case. Ha said the position at XJresent was that tho case drawn by himself and Mr. Ireland for their respective clients had not been approved by either solicitor. It was then referred to his Worship to state a case. His Worship had stated a case,.but stated it in such a way that it was useless sending it to the Supreme Court, as it would net be entertained in its present shape. He had drawn his Worship’s attention to the omission of the necessary allegation* that the parties had not agreed, and had pointed out the ruling of the Supreme Court on this point; also, the omission of a statement showing that the Court had been closed on the Saturday and Monday after the decision, so that the bond could not be entered into within three days. That, besides these objections to the case as stated by his Worship, no evidence at all was set out, and as he (Mr. O’Reilly) relied upon the case as it appeared in the evidence, the suppression of the evidence made it useless to proceeed. . As the fact was patent that an injustice had been done his client to the extent of 112 acres, at 3s. per acre, he now applied for a re-hearing of the case, so that the injustice could he remedied. Mr. Branson objected. Mr. O’Reilly could set out the omission stated in his affidavit, and bring it before the Supreme Court in that way. This application had been made before, and his Worship had exercised his discretion. He could not now entertain it. Mr. O’Reilly said, as to mending his Worship’s omission by an affidavit, if the case was called on in the .Supreme Court, it would at once appear. His Worship’s jurisdiction to state a case was not shown. He and his affidavit would be out of Court, and the case would be sent back. His Worship had, in the express terms of the Act a discretion to grant a re-heai’ing at any time. His Worship said he would dismiss the application. Mr. Branson applied for costs. His Worship allowed one guinea. Mr. O’Reilly asked his Worship’s authority to give costs, and His Worship referred to the Act of 1879, which gave him power to give costs in actions where he had no jurisdiction. Mr. O’Reilly—And that is your authority ? His Worship—Yes. Mr. O’Reilly—Then I shall certainly go for a prohibition.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

Bibliographic details

GUILD Y. KINGSBURY., Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 115, 19 June 1880

Word Count

GUILD Y. KINGSBURY. Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 115, 19 June 1880