CIVIL CASES.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 13738, 20 May 1910, Page 3

CIVIL CASES.

Judgment was given for plaintiffs, with costs, by default, in the following cases:—L. W. Balkind v. It. Pascoe, 10s; same v. \V. Adams, ios; same v. Herbert John Wat kins, £1 0s Gd; same v \V. McG;?gor, 12s 6d ; same v. Louis Brogan. £G is 3d; same v John Smith, £1 2s Id: same v. J. T. Cox, l">s: same v. A. Hennessy, 0s; same v. E. Demioheii, £1 os lid: same v. E. J. Seymour, £G 12s; same v. E. Townsend 9s: Lyttelton Times Company v. Alfred W. Smith, to Is; S. Hunt (Mr Leathern) v W. rl. Tozer. £2 3s, J. Hatfield (Mr Mosley) v. L. C. Wood. £1 Is; Hid lev and Son. Lt<L. 'Mr Howe) v. J. T. Kilworth. £1 10s; L. Browning (Mr Bowo) v. S. Goodwin, £3 Is lid; same v. K. O'Connor, £1 2s: Hayward and Simpson (Mr Rowe) v. M. Golding, £2 13s; E. W. I'idgcon and Co., Ltd (Mr Howe) v J. Conrell. £.5-5 lis; same v. t*. V Lloyd. £2 17s Gd , same v. J. Powol! and Sons, 5s (costs only); same v. H. A. Wilson, 12s f>d; Whittaker Bros. (Mr Rowe) •-. Mrs X. Morrison. £1 ISs 9d : A. M. Chivers •Mr Mosley) v. Albert Dyer, £3 N.Z. Farmers' Co-op. Association (Mr Helmore) v. Rob.frt Webber, £13 10s 3d; name v. Joseph Hill. £S Is. Gd; .same v. .Mrs M. Joines, £2.5 4s 8d; same v. John Mcßeath, £2 0s 7d; Gibbons and Co. v L. Dufiicid £1 ss, Reid and Gray (Mi Wilding) v. T. Chnmltrs, £9 ■Vs4d.

G. W. West claimed £2 los from James Spence (Mr Hunter), arrears of wago.i since December. Tho defendant had paid £1 3s JOd into Court as the amount owing. Mr Hunter said that the defendant had engaged plaintiff as a porter at £1 per week, and later ha was informed by the Inspector of Fac tories he would have to get a permit, as tho minimum wage was 2.5s per week under the. award. He told plaintiff to get a permit, and understood he applied and got one. Subsequently he found out this was not the case, and both parties wr.ro fined for a breach of the award. The amount paid into Court represented throe months' arrears, which under section ul of the Conciliation and Arbitratiou Act was all plaintiff could recover. The plaintiff denied he had represented to defendant ho had a permit. The Magistrate said that all plaintiff was on titled to was throe mouths' arrears, and gave judgment for tho omount paid into Court. He allowed defendant 10s Gd costs.

A. C. J. Martin (Mr Cassidy) claimed £2-5 from Ernest L. Smith (Mr Leathern), an amount paid for buildin.c a motor-engine for a flying machine. Defendant not having filed his defence in time, judgment was given for plaintiff •with costs.