RECOVERY OF FEES.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 58, Issue 38, 24 November 1937, Page 3

RECOVERY OF FEES.

CHIROPRACTOR WINS CASE. (Per Press Association.) WANGANUI, November 23. A case of interest to chiropractors arising from a claim for £2 2s was heard in the Magistrate’s Court between Stephen Nolan, a chiropractor, and Stephen Uootc, a letter carrier. Mr V. B. Willis, for the defence, said that under Section 28 of the Medical Practitioners Act a chiropractor had no protection and was not entitled to sue for fees. He contended that plaintiff was not a registered person, and, unless a person performing a medical service was registered, lie could not suo for fees. The Magistrate said the question became a simple one. Were the services rendered by the plaintiff medical or surgical, advice or attendance? He referred to the case of McNaughton v. Douglas in 1927, where the Appeal Court took the view that the services rendered should he split up into manipulative treatment for which judgment should be given, hut that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover for advice. Judgment was given for Nolan for services rendered under manipulative , treatment.