Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
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.

IMPORTANT TO LITIGANTS.

From the Wellington Post,

At the conclusion of a judgment summons case in the Resident Magistrate’s Court this morning, Mr. Shaw gave a ruling with reference to a question raised in Court last week, viz., is the defendant

to a judgment summons entitled to his travelling expenses before he can be compelled to attend Court for the purpose of being examined as to his ability to discharge a debt ! His Worship referred to a decision of Mr. Justice Williams on the subject, tho learned Judge ruling that such a defendant is in the position of a witness, and is consequently entitled to his expenses ; and, he (Mr, Shaw) found that it was most universal in the colony that where a defendant’s evidence was acquisite to prove the plaintiff’s case he becomes a witness in the Court, and before an order could be made for contempt for non-appearance it was necessary to be shown that such a defendant had been paid his expenses. This practice was followed in the Nelson, Dunedin, Hokitika, and Napier districts, and there seemed to be a consensus of opinion on the matter, which was fair and obvious. As the matter was one of considerable importance to litigants, he would like it to be understood that if a plaintiff’ is in a position to prove a defendant’s ability to pay at the time, then two courses are open to him—either to summon the defendant at the Court where the latter resides, or to tender his expenses to a foreign Court. Mi-, Fite, herbert remarked that Mr. Giles, R.M, of Hokitika, once ordered a plaintiff, to pay a defendant’s travelling expenses, and the defendant appropriated the money to pay hjs passage to Melbourne. Mr. Shaw etorted that in Dunedin, where the people were particularly “ canny,” such plaintiffs did not forward the money, but transmitted a second-class ticket for the journey instead, so that if the defendant failed to avail himself of it he might be committed for contempt.

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

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AG18800821.2.13

Bibliographic details

IMPORTANT TO LITIGANTS., Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 142, 21 August 1880

Word Count
333

IMPORTANT TO LITIGANTS. Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 142, 21 August 1880

Working