Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

COURT OF APPEAL.

(PBESS ASSOCIATION TELEGRAM.)

WELLINGTON, May 20. A special Court was taken up this afternoon with the case of the Official Assignee of Hudson v the New Zealand Antimony Company. Justices Williams, Denniston and Conolly were on the Bench. The case was an appeal from the decision of the Chief Justice. Hudson contracted, to rebuild certain furnaces for the Company, and he was to be paid on the certificate of the inspector of the Company. • The contract required the cylinders to be made of fire-resisting materials, made to the necessary shape and thickness to ensure durability. The furnaces when completed and in thorough working order were to be worked by the contractor for twelve days, and on the expiry of that period they were to be still in good working order and to the full satisfaction of the Inspector, j on whose certificate only would they be taken over. The sole question was whether a certain document amounted to a final certificate on which the Company were bound to pay Hudson or his assignee after bankruptcy. The document referred to was as follows:—" I certify that Mr Hudson ! has rebuilt the furnaces with fire clay bricks and cylinders, and has worked them the twelve days as per contract. Upon examining them I found them working satisfactorily. Since then they have been cooleddown, and upon examination it was found that the entire cylinders in two cases had cracked, and that the joints in the other cylinders had opened. These Hudson assured mc can be stopped with a mixture of plumbago, which will render the furnaces perfectly sound." The Chief Justice held that this did not amount to a certificate that the contract. had been complied with, and the Official Assignee now appealed' from this decision. After hearing argument, their Honors gave judgment dismissing the appeal. They held that the document must be taken as a whole, and that it was impossible to take tho fir3t half of it and rely oh that as a complete certificate. Costs on lowest scale were allowed.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP18910521.2.71

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume XLVIII, Issue 7869, 21 May 1891, Page 6

Word Count
343

COURT OF APPEAL. Press, Volume XLVIII, Issue 7869, 21 May 1891, Page 6

COURT OF APPEAL. Press, Volume XLVIII, Issue 7869, 21 May 1891, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert