THE COURTS.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 18526, 30 October 1925, Page 3

THE COURTS.

SUPREME COURT. (Before Ma Honour Mr Justice Adams.) FATHER SUES SONS. William Join Stevens claimed ££o 17s Sd and interest from Stevens a.r.d Sons. Mr F. W. Johnston, with him Xlr E. "W. White, appeared for the pimaiifx, and Mr S. Tvyiieham for the defendant company. Tha statement of claim eet out that on agreement was made in November, 1919, between tho plaintiff and E. W. Stevens, s! H. Stevems, A- J. Stevens, 2. C. F. Stevens, 53. P. Stereos, and William K. Mills n*; trustee for a company to be called Sievcns aJKi Sons, Ltd. It wee agreed that tho oompanv should purchaso the busir.eas. It fas a term of the agreement thill tho company should pay or satisfy, discharge, and perforin all tie continuing debts and liaoilities, contracts, obligations, and engagements of tho vendor, including a sum of £6O and interest thereon owing by tho vendor to David John Hathaway. It was a further term of the agreement that os eoon is the agreement should haw been adopted by the oompaiiy all liability of the trustee thereon should ccsee. The plaintiff had discharged all his obligations under the agreeTnerrt. At th*> date of the agreement the plaintiff was indebted to tho Government Insurance Commissioner for £7O 18b 2d by virtue of divers mortgages of his life policy carrying interest at 6 per cent., such indebtedness having been incur reel by plaintiff connexion with loans raised for tho purpose csE the business. The defendant company refused iokJ failed to pay the debt, and the plaintiS had been obliged to pay it witi interest amounting to £IS 10a 6d up to March 36th, 1935, making a total of £B3 17a Bd. Plaintiff claimed the sum of £B9 17s Si, and interest thereon from March 26th at tlio rato of 6 per cent, per annum. He defence wis a denial that plaintiS waa indebted to the Government Insurance Commissioner. If plaintiS vrero indebted, the company denied that the indebtedness was incurred by plaintiff in connexion with loons raised for the business, or that the were used in the business. A further defence was that if there were a debt it was owing by plaintiff personally, and was not a "continuing debt and liability" of plaintiff in relation to the business; and that plaintiS, by his conduct, was ostapped from denying that it was his indebtedness. Mr Johnston said, that tho case had bean removed from the Magistrate's Court. The plaintiS in. evidence said that when the agieement was made he owned the business. He gavo his Eons 250 shares each in the business. Tho point had been raised thai 2 he married again the wife would secure a share of the business, and the eons wanted it all. So a company was formed on condition that the company paid all the plaintiffs debts. Mr Twyne&am applied for a nonsuit, on the grounds that tho evidence disclosed such a state of affaire as to stop the plaintiff from claiming from the defendant company. Tho evidence for the defence waa taken. Herbert Stevens, manager of the defendant company, said that it was about two years and a half after tho company wag formed that, tho debt in question was first mentioned. Ho denied his father's suggestion sbout the plaintiff marrying l again. To his Honour: The value of the buildings and property was £3200 when tho company was formed. The sum of £IBO waa owing to the Insurance Commissioner, but if witness had known that the company would be liable for it, he would not has® entered into tho agreement. Counsel did cot address tho Count, and his Honour, summing up, said that he must hold that the debt was incurred for tho business. It waa obvious thai the old man was stripping himself of his property and settling it in the way in which it would ultimately go to his eons. Plaintiff was entitled to judgment for the amount claimed with costs.

MAGISTERIAL. THUB3DAY. (Before Mr H. Y. Widdowson, SOL) - , DStTfTKENKESS. William Howell, aged 75 years, was convicted and discharged, on a charge of being found ■ drunk while in charge of a horse and cart. Seniot-Sergeant F. Lewin said defendant had over sixty previous convictions. A woman, who was found drank in Papanm road, was fined 10s, in default twenty-four hours' imprisonment. DAMAGE TO WINDOWS. John Snlliv&n was charged with having wilfully broken three panes of glass, valued at £3, in the windows of a building, the property of Mary McSweanoy, and with having unlawfully assaulted James A plea of guilty was entered. _ Senior-Sergeant Lewin said that defendant had gone to the residence of Mrs McSweeney, who- was his mother-in-law, in Papanui, and had done the damage which was the subject of the charge. Burrowes went _ to the assistance of the woman, and Sullivan struck hfm Xtefemdaat had been arrested at Ksiapoi. Mr A- J. Malhjy, who appeared far Sullivan's wife, said that he was in arrears on a maintenance order made in her favour. She had not seen him for eighteen months. Burro wes said that a doctor had informed him that he might loso the sight of _hi3 eye. He lifted a large white bandage, disc losing that his left eye had been closed. His Worship said it was a problem aa to whether he should deal with the assault charge until it was seen what damage had been inflicted to Burrowes. He adjourned the charge of assault for a_ week. _ * Senior-Sergeant Lewin said the police had been put to considerable expense in arresting Sullivan at Kaiapoi. 1 The Bench: Under the circumstances, I don't propose to inflict a fine. Defendant will be sentenced to one month's imprisonment with hard labour. CIVIL BUSINESS. Judgment for the plaintiff by default with costs was given in the following cases:— Tench Bros., Ltd., v. A. Niven, £4 15s 6d; Charles S. Thomas v. W. Humphreys, 10s 6d; P. Kennedy v. J. H. Ferguson, £43 Is sd; T. H. Green and Co., Ltd., v. A. E. Prinder, £23 16s; Thomas Brown, Ltd., v. T, and J. Mayo, trading as Mayo Bros., £ls 16s 3d; Guillermo and Co., Ltd., v. W. Major, £2 9s 2d; Commissioner of Taxes v. E. W. Clarke, £1 Is; same v. Premier Pictures, Ltd., £7; W. McLaughlan v. W. J. Henry, £10; Jones and Tindall v. H. Murphy, £4; Simms and Sons, Ltd., v. J. Beard, £3l 13s 6d; N-Z. Farmers' Co-op., Ltd, v. P, 0. Davison, £3 7s; same v. W. Gray, £3 16s sd; Simms and Sons v. A. B. Williams, £1 18s 6d; Kiddey Bros. v. B. Mallash, £2 19s 6d; James Fleming. Ltd, v. M. McGrath, £6 12s Id; F. D. Eesteven v. G. A. James and P. Kirby, £SO 10s; P. and D. Duncan, Ltd., v. W. L. Longhlin, £3; Briscoe and Co., Ltd., v. B. Kennedy, £9 12s 6d; P. E. Clark and Co., Ltd., v. R. White, £l3 2s 4d; D. A. 0. Knight v. Maurice Knight, £10; Charles S. Thomas v. Cyril Clarence Hill, £1 10s; Guillermo and Co., Ltd., v. Mrs Alice Alsweiler, £3 14a 8d; Dominion Mercantile Agency, LtcL, v. A. E. Stevens, £5 9s sd; E. G. Keats v. J. T. Foster, £3 10s; Johnson and Couzins, LtdL, v. A. Cooper, £1 15s; Para Bubber Co., Ltd., v. J. Simpson, £2 12s 6d; same v. M. Ritchie, costs only; Goodrich Silvertown Tires, Ltd., v. Joseph Springfield, costs only; Charles S. Thomas v. Stanley N. Hodgson, costs only; Dalgety and LtdL, v. L. Glanville, £2l 12s 9d; Smith and Jarden v. W. Paddy, £3 15s; E. J.- Armigcr v. J. B. Pearson, £3 lis 6d; O. F. Watson v. W. Smith, £lO 8s 9d; Williams Stephens and Co., Ltd., v. B. M. Taiaroa, £39 18s; Raymond, Stringer, Hamilton, and Donnelly v. 0. J. Parker, £7 7s; London Clearing House v. Julia Buddie, £3B 4s 3d; Downings, Ltd., v. J. Roberts, £2 2s 6d; Nurse Gregg v. Carl Bergamini, £1 10s; C. E. Otley, Ltd., v. L. J. Shsard, £5 4s; Butler Cycle Works v. P. Middlcton, £2 14s 8d; Harry Fisher v. L. Haliday, £1; same v. C. Clancy, £1 15s; Wilson Bros. v. S. Forbes, £5 14s 4d; Distributors, Ltd, v. Albert Wiszell and Nolan Wisaell, £1 12s. Joseph Walker wad ordered to pay W. J. McKamria £4 5a lid forthwith, in default five days' imprisonment. S. H. Hill was onlered to pay the Ikwuydale Wine Co. £3 193 6d forthwith, in default foar days' imprisonment. D. Gorrio was ordered to pay W. J. Sutherland £3 7s, in default three days' imprisonment, the warrant to bo suspended so long aa defendant pays 5s per week. Albert lansdown was ordered to pay the Janes Cycle Co. £4 14s fid forthwith, in default seven days' imprisonment. CLAIM FOR BOABD LODGING. Ellen Stigley (Mr A. EL Cavcll), boardingl- - 4.77 avenue, proceeded against Edward Hand, . 12 Aldred street, labourer, for £7 15a, balance of account for board and lodging for defendant's wife and two children. After hearing the evidence the Magistrate gav® judgment for tho plaintiff for the amount claimed, together with costs. APPRENTICESHIP ACT. S. E. MoGiegor, inspected of awards, proceeded against William Sykes, builder, for o, bieach of the Apprenticeship Act. It was stated that a hsssy penalty was not inr J and that the case had been brought for tho purpose of warning employers that they might not employ apprentices without the sanction of the Apprenticeship Committee they have been in business for two yaais. A penalty of £1 was imposed. AUBEARS OF BEST. B. G. Smith (Mr H. S. J. Goodman) proceeded against John. "Watts (Mr H. Ellingworth) for arrears of rent, £9 lis. Defendant vacated the premises in Aaguat, 322 V 2» asfedj, jasda: Bens jsa-

Btrxtkw Act, fox tha capita! vale* of tho I house to bo fijtod. on tho ground, j rent was too high. [ Tho Magistrate held that as defendant j had vacated the promises ho could not j claim the advantages of tho Bent Restriction j Act. Judgment was given for the plaintiff for £S 2s and ocsis. j CLAIM FOE WORK DONE. j "N". M. Hawkins <Mr C. fj. Thomas), • pap?;/..:r.ger, oi Chnstchureh, proceeded a " H. Coloima (Mr A. R. Kui), res- •. t.:. .. proprietor, of 161 Deans avenue, 1.-.,,..rt0n, for £ll for work done and goods , supplied in repairing and paparing i roams. Tho defence wits that tho work was i done by way of a gift, _ I Tho Magistrate said the cans of proving j '.hat tho work was a gift was on the d» j iendant, and ho had not done this. Jndg« j mont was given for ihe plaintiff far tbj amonns claimed with costs. BUILDERS' DISPUTE. The Dominion Home Builders, Ltd. {Mr , Rosa), claimed under the Wages Protection and Contractors' Liens Act, 1906, to recover from Lavinia Martha Burgess Thomas (Mr j A. W. Brown), wife of Jcitn George Bur- ' gess Thomas, builder, oi Clmstchurch, tho sum of £B4 16s 5d for timber and materials supplied iu connexion with tie erection of : shcDa and a residence for the defendant. ! Alter evidenoe had been heard, Mr Brown moved for a non-suit on the grounds thai no continuing contract within tho meaning of the Act had been proved. j Tho Magistrate reserved his decision on ; tho nonsuit point. DA&FIELD. (Before Messrs R. Reid and I). McMillan. ; JJ.'s.) j "W. B. Manning, Inspector of Stock, proceeded : ajrainst Frederick G. Collison for two breaches j of the Slaughtering and Inspection Act. For . failing to keep his slaughterhouse cleansed : and drainod a fine of £5 and costs 7s wis , imposed, and for feeding pigs on unboileJ . meat and oif&l, a fine of £2 ana 19s costs f was imposed. : Tho Court remarked that these cases vrarr ! serious, as it was a matter that concerned , tho hoalth of tho people. The defendant's ■ license would be endorsed, and ahould V-3 : come before the Court again it would prob- ■ ably bo cancelled. The defendant had bee'J previously convicted, and had also bee\ • warned by the inspector. | j IN OTHER PLACES. ; THEFT. (rsßss Assocomoir tile a e am.) WELLINGTON', October 23. In tihe Supreme Court James "Walsh, for the theft of money is connexion with a benefit art union, waa found guilty. Ho was remanded for sentence.