MUNICIPAL WORKS

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 53, Issue 151, 7 April 1933, Page 3

MUNICIPAL WORKS

FOOTWAYS AND CHANNELS. A QUESTION OF RATING. (Per Press Association) WELLINGTON, April G. In the case of the .Palmerston North City Council v. Waghorn and Wrightman, the Full Court this afternoon heard argument on an originating summons requiring an interpretation of a section of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1920, which empowers the council to recover, as a rate, an amount up to half the cost of permanent improvements to footways, channels, etc., from owners of frontings adjoining the improvements. Action was taken in the Magistrate s Court by tne council to recover from defendants the amount one for improvements to pathways wnicli tlieii land adjoined, as tnere were a number of actions, the Magistrate asiteu for an authoritative decision. Tne summons also asked whether tne owner of land and buildings fronting a footpath was liable for the full hall cost of construction when the cost had already been paid for out oi unemployment moneys. Counsel for plaintiff was Air J. O’Shea, and for defendants Mr AI. H. Oram. Argument was submitted by Mr O’Shea to show that the charge was a statutory debt which could be claimed without reference to the ltating Act and therefore the council was allowed a period of 20 years to make the claim. He submitted also that whether the council was paid out of unemployment moneys or not did not affect its statutory rights to half the cost of construction. Air Oram contended that the money must he sued for as a rate and as the period of three years had elapsed since the moneys became owing, they could not now he recoverable. The Court adjourned.