SELLING LAND FOR RATES

Auckland Star, Volume XX, Issue 246, 16 October 1889, Page 5

SELLING LAND FOR RATES

THE CONVEYANCE CANCELLED.

HOBSON COUNTY CAST IN COSTS,

At the Supreme Court this morning His Honor delivered judgment in the case of Alex. Finlayson v. the Hobson County Council and others. Mr Cooper appeared for plaintiff, Mr Hesketh for the County Council, Mr Button for the Registrar of the Supreme Court, and Mr Cotter for McDougall, who had purchased the land.

Ib will be remembered thab the case was one in which cerbain land had been sold by the Registrar on a judgment obtained by the Hobson County Council agaiasb T. Motion Olliver for non-payment of rates. The land was bought by Mr McDougall; bub it was found that Finlayson was the owner and. that Olliver had never owned ib^ or had any connection with ib ; in fa"ct, no such person could be found. Mr Finlayson then brought this action to recover the land and damages from the parties at fault. The case \va3 fought out some days ago, and His Honor reserved judgment, which he delivered to-day. His Honor said the action had been brought to set aside the conveyance of land to McDougall, which had been sold for nonpayment of rates on a judgment obtained by the Hobson County Council. Owing to a blunder, the name of T. M. Olliveirhad been pub down for section 14 and two others, so that there were three names for the same land. A very little care might have shown this error to the person who made up the rate-book. It appeared that Olliver's rates had nob been paid, but there seemed to be no Olliver. The Council had then proceeded against Olliver, or owner, but the particulars were so bad that he wondered why the.R.M. had entered judgment as he did against Olliver. The Registrar had written to the clerk of the Council for further particulars as to the land to be sold for judgment, and the clerk had supplied the information. In doing so he did not incur any liability on behalf of the Council, and so Mr Hesketh's contention thab his action did nob bind the Council could not be upheld, as he simply supplied an omission. The notices of sale were nob perfectly correct, and no notice had been posted on the land. The land was not properly described till the time of sale. The conveyance of the land to McDoueall stated that the land was conveyed on behalf of owner or owners, whereas ib was sold as Olliver's land. Tho contention, that though all the proceedings had been irregular McDougall's title was uninjured, coiild iibt stand. In the present case, Olliver had no rateable property, and would justify the Court in setting aside any judgment against him for rates, even if all the other proceedings had nc,t been irregular. His decree would be that the conveyance be cancelled and that registration be cancelled. As regards damages and costs the plaintiff was entitled of course to costs, but damages outside the value of the land had not been great. The County Council was the principal, though not the sole, cause of the mistakes that had been made. The Registrar was to a certain extent blameable, but he was acting on instructions from the Council. McDougall was without doubt an innocent party, and it wus doubtful how coon he became aware thab plaintiff claimed the land.

His decree would be that the conveyance be delivered up and cancelled; that the registration be cancelled; that the Hobson County Council pay plaintiff £50 damages and costs on the lowesb scale, with two days extra atfifteen guineas a day ; that the Council pay McDougall's costs on the lowest scale, with two days exbra ab fifbeen guineas a day ; and that plaintiff pay £50 compensation to McDougall for the improvements done on the land.

At the request of Mr Cotter His Honor agreed to modify the wording of tho first part of the decree to suit counsel.