THE COURTS.

Press, Volume LIX, Issue 17937, 4 December 1923, Page 11

THE COURTS.

SUPREME COURT. (Beiozo liia Hotour Mr Just;co Adazu--, 1 appeal allowed. An cppeai ogiirsi a- judgment £- r e- D ,- Mr 11. Y. Yfiddovson. :r. a ;s : ?ee& Cj*JiFion Cii3c, 7;a3 heard ni Banco, a». 1 Supremo Court yestore ay Tho appca* " vra3 m.adc on poir.'s c: lav/ ar.d factIn tho Court A. Heath George Heath, an infant) h:id been .£35 (iaiEaros and costs £ll 5= , ;n connexion v/ith a coi'isiojz which -occurred ozi Ist. 192 H, hetvreen & :ri<iden p r A. B. Fraser, the defendant. and a ?- sU b:cy e] e, ridden bv the hoy - held that Fraser rode his motv/r-cyc?e and on the "vtrrong -'' io of the road to the kc cn«- wiw heard on Seotenwer 20 th, '2lst. ar.d •27th. The apnea; v, ,i? :rado hy Fraser. cn t-'-s grounds' ihaf the Xc.™)* 4 . v.-** v. rorg :n JlO- - th-.i 1- the u .n- to -he | of the ph-tiniih ; th«t. jV*d£- , j inert was yitoitc in holding" That upoa in* | evidence defendant was j negligence a3 to entitle the plaintiif * (cover judgment in tho circuzz/uanres : t.iat j ! the erroneously decided th&y j j whereas the plaintiff was negligent, h:s r.egii- | i genee iva3 not s"ch as to disentitle him from j i recovering judgment : and that, from tho j proved cr adrnitied facts, the .Magistrate j failed to draw the ov'.y true conclusion to | be drawn, viz.. that the plaintiff was himself rruiiiy cf such netrliscr.ee as to disentitle him fro jr. rrrcverinjr judgment. 3fr H. ~W. "White appeared for the appellant and Mr IV. II Lasccllcs represented the respondent. Mr White submitted that the appellant wa3 entitled i-o succeed because ihi* evidence ! ciearly ehovijxl that he; v.-as travelling aud took every precaution. TJie ooy rode j round tho end of some tri;m-t railers '-vhich j were -standing in Moorhonsc and ran) into Fraser, who was ridinir his r:wtor-ryel© | and pideear in the oppnsite direction. Uvaser j

| had titbor to turn ono way and crash ii l ' o | the trailer or turn (lio other and risk hilling the hoy. lie took tlio hitter course and 60 promptly did he act that. tho hoy just struck I the lust part of the sidecar, and a hiucJi more sc-rioii3 accident *v a s averted. It was ohov;n (hat the boy in cutting :round the end of the trailer had pono on to his wrong side of the road, according to the by-iawa. Mr ]jaßcellca held that Fraser could have averted t]io accident had he not been liegli" B ent - . , ■ i His Honour ea:d that, he wts unao:e to say that- Ileaih's action in cutting diagonally across the street, and in iJassing' closo to the trailers, without knowing- what -was on the other side, did not amount to negligence. A street entered by a cyclist should ho crossed on the proper side, and the journey should he continued along that street on. the left-hand side in order . that traffio should ho continuous as far as possible on each side. Heath, eager, 110 doubt, to do his message and get, his parcel on to the train, took a risk and cut across at an angtOFraser was on his "wrong aide, and was going along from behind the trailers, lb© trailers hid fho tivo riders from each other. If either had done what he ought, fo have done, or had not done what he ought not to have done, one or the other would luive got past safely. His Honour said he could iind no circumstances in fho evidence to enable _him to say that anything was dono or omitted by appellant that would make him responsible. Tho appeal must be allowed. His Honour allowed appellant £lO 10s costs, and disbursements. PROVISION" UJNTDEJt "WILL. An application was made by Annie Louisa Armstrong, spinster, of Southbrjdge, for further provision under tho will of her mother, Eliza Armstrong, who died on December 7th, 1322. Tho claim was made under the Family Protection Act, 190°. Mrs Eliza Armstrong was a. widow when she died, and alio left an estate valued at £709. Tho eum of £lio was left to plaintiff, including a separate legacy of £!)0, and £SO, her share in the balance of the estate divided among 3cliildren. Plaintiff alleged that tlva will had not made adoquato provision for her, as she had worked at her mother's horse. The defendant was set down as Robert George Armstrong, farm labourer, of Southbridge, executor and trustee of the will of Mrs Armstrong. Mr E. W. "White appeared fcr plaintiff and Mr J. H. Upharu represented the defendant.

Mr Upham explained that plaintiff was ono of 12 children, who benefited tinder... th» will, The father, who had died a few years before the mother, was a. labourer, and lis had' owned a. email farm of 12 to 15 acres. Later he sold 11 acres and lived on two acreß of his own, and another couplo of acres. All tie children had contributed to tho support of their parents and worked on the small farm. Each of tliem was a necessitous person, not ono was affluent, and several of the girls _ wero unmarried and cut at service. Some of the boys were married, and iieveral had returned from the war with injuries. They wero all living on small Three sections of land were bought in the another's lifetime, and plaintiff claimed that ono of them had been bought with her money. Plaintiff would get £l5B, which was roughly one-fifth of the estate, and she was a woman who was able to earn her own living, i?se her brothers and sisters. At tho present time she was earning 25s por week. Counsel' submitted that amplo provision liad been made in the will.

Ten -members of the family gate evidence and the case was then adjourned until 10.30 a.m. to-day.

MAGISTERIAL. MONDAY. (Before Mr H. Y. AViddowsen, S'.M.) DBUNKEXXBSS. Two first offenders were each convicted and fined 20a, the amount of their bai.l,«in default <ltJ hours' imprisonment. A etatutory first offender wus convicted and fined 10s, in default 24 hou::s' imprisonment. CIVIL BUSINESS. Judgment by default was given for the plaintijf in each of the iollow.mg cases : lN'./J. Tyre and Kubber Co. v. iS. iNicholson, £9 2s; Miss J. li<*dger v. J. A. Barber, £ii 8s Gd; A. Symo and Co. v. J' J. Walker, £tj 6s; Chas. Thomas v. F,, <7. Haines, £<J 10a Od; Adams, Ltd., v. J. Foby, £75 10s; Drivers' Union v. S. Forbes, £2 5s Gd; Booth, Macdonald and Co., Ltd., v. J. M, McFarlane, £1 -s Ca; Bristol Piano Co., Ltd., -v. Mrs Emily Hamilton,, £llO 17s; W. J. Hunter v. James lOnright, £G 2s; Cha3. W. Hervey v. Lichfield C'oa,l Depot, £G; Adeline Brume- v. Arthur Brunie, £2l; Purity Products Co., Ltd.,.v. H. B. Pimm, £7 Is 8d; Dominion Home Builders, Ltd., v. vt. Watson, £i 7s Id; V>\ Strango and Co., Ltd., v. John Millen, £3l 17s lid; H. Oakley and Sons, Ltd., v. L. E. trceman, £'4l 10s 3d; the Kiwi Dairy Co., Ltd., v. J. McLaren, £SB lis 7d. Donald Tweedic was ordered to pay Clara Twecdie the &uc. if £5/, in default six weeks' imprisonment, the warrant to bo suspended' while he pays the deb's at the rate of not less than £1 weekly. D. W. Murray was ordered to pay A; C. Coonibe £IC 3s 2d forthwith, in default 16 days' imprisoneient. No orders were mad 9 in tho following cases:—Mason, Struthers and Co.. Ltd.., v. William Alfred McDonald, claim £74 5s Ed; liarry W«tson v. James Henderson, claim £42 lis. BREACH OF LEASE. L. R. K. Allison, fruitgrower,, Christchurch. (Mr T. W. Kowe) claimed from Edwin Eden, farmer, Lansdowne (W.r A. C. Brassingt-on) the sum of £7B Ss Sd by way of damages arising out of a breach of leaso. It was stated for tho plaintiff that, in November, 1921, tho defendant leased a small farm at Lansdowne, He was to kcejj the property in good order, and a.t the termination of his lease he was to sow down English grasses. For the defence, it was claimed that tue rental asked was excessive, and that the defendant waa unabio to carry cn tho farm. The lease had been signed without being read, and tho defendant liad not inspected the property, iie was almost an illiterate man. Judgment was given for the plaintiff for the amount claimed, with costs amounting' to 15 s -

KAKGIOEjL {Bcioi® Messrs AV. A. Bjo"sv£<» taxd "W. A. Ba&ks, Judgment for plaintiff was given in filch o£ the following cases:—Commissioner oi Tasee v. William Kit-cMe, claim £i 3s 9d and costs, 15a; Ivorya, Limited v. George McDonald, £-2 12s 6d, costs, £1 9s; eajua v. P. Askew for £2 12s 9(1, oasis, £1 9a 6d. Mts M. Guy v.ae convicted and ordered to pay costs only for allowing 2-1 cows to wander at Saltwater Cieck. On three charges of allowing cattle to b® at largo at Saltwater Creei;, Hiram Orchard {(leaded guilty and w&a convicted and fined 10s on the last charge and oidored to cpay ocflta, £2 12a.