DAMAGES CLAIM FAILS.

Press, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20551, 20 May 1932, Page 9

DAMAGES CLAIM FAILS.

} MifJGENCE BY FIRM ' J ALLEGED. !-<X$$gGT OF APPEAL AGAINST > §, LAND TAX. <;& . judgment was given by his 8?$» Mr Justice Adams, in the : Court yesterdayy in the case : *,j£p|t Samuel Smith, a Cust farmer, dj|l£|£. from the New Zealand '■ Mjißjto? Co-operative Association or Gnsiejbpry, Limited, the sum of £261 %s|dainages for alleged negligence *J|||pnduct of an appeal on his be?SJK« relief from an assessment for 4fjji||&nd tax. The claim was made SA&bfofi to an action for £274 2s mjirbich sum the defendant, Smith, be owing. jflfe Honour entered judgment for ""•Fanners' Co-operative Association *;tl» original claim- and held that ..counter-claim for damages Maffaa,. in giving judgment, Jffij- defendant is a farmer carrying g*g lousiness at Oust." For a numWgWim he has sent all the produce 7%farm to the plaintiff company .?£-W»*and all his monetary transSW» gave been transacted through -IfoSPJlsAy, the plaintiff drawing on the company ?!*>>!!» to, time for such moneys as ?f Hatred:- It is contended that !g,?tainy was acting as his banker responsibility and WSSfSSnA this is denied and I do Mir *" necessar y to decide the to Land Tax. •||p;j&erence to land tax, the*rehas been that the deI Mrarh* ott rece ip* °f ea ch annual ■ s^ssment ' nas taken the of the company's ■ Jwta'ir' 0 at n g^ ora > an d the ■ f otne whatever was necestlle tax ' de Wting the in defendant's account in November 6th, 1929, received notice from m of Taxes that he had BlwErigSfl * or 6 P e cial land tax under KsJffiiulL^ 10 an< i Income Tax warning as to lodging ■p||^^|tf f - : .On or about November Ager, plaintiff's manand gave him the B^^^Si/^ r Ager said he would office, the reasonbeing that the company BSsranKr-l 0 matter in due •i^^^i defendant says.that on W}|iliSp%N told Mr Ager that ho M~«h33& *rticle in the Press statfarmer should lodge an no doubt that the deW^|||||raL ln: his mind article B^l'ihjjjlP^.-with reference to the ■S^^^ iion 3 of the Land A men dment Act, >i. S ' la " re f er later, and ■ h^oS^ * h * B a * so * n *"" ™ l iS^wi^n !olne ax -Amendment »BBHJB~a^ m ission to enquire a ny cases of hardship nPnP^B^^ 1 imposition wa3 appointed on Bsilllisfr- 1929—New Zealand . H3§|§Blit& 3122 - The CommisBtlllflNPPSrKl to report not later .■«■»."** 1930. The Com-

mission continued to hear applications for relief under the reference up to January 24th, or a day or two later. Letter to Defendant. On December 7th, 1929, Mr Ager, on instructions from the head office, wrote the following letter to the defendant: Head office write stating that ia order to lodge formal objection to the super tax it will be necessary to send to the Commissioner of Taxes a return of income expenditure, and also to establish a claim as to hardship. "We would be pleased to discuss this matter with you at your earliest convenience. The defendant says he does not remember having received this letter—that he might.have got a letter like it, but docs not remember receiving one. lam satisfied that he did receive the letter, the addressing and posting of which are proved. His memory does not appear to be very good, and the receipt of the letter was no doubt forgotten. He says that ho came in to see Mr Ager in the middle of December, which, would be a week after the letter was posted. Mr Ager says that at this interview he referred to the letter and told the defendant that he would have to put in an appeal to prove hardship, and also told him to see, a solicitor or an accountant, and that the defendant replied that as he could see that Sir Joseph "Ward was not going to let anybody off he did not care about doing it, "That," Mr Ager says, "closed the matter." The defendant denies that in the middle of December he told Mr Ager that he would no£ Idther with the objection, as he could see Sir Joseph Ward was not letting anybody off but says that he made similar remarks to that in November. He also says in cross-examination that at that time he held something like £34,000 worth of capital in land, and his mortgages would be about £BOOO, and that on those figures it could not be shown that there was much hardship. Company's Besponsibility Ended. J I accept Mr Ager's account-of the I interview between him and the defendant in December, and find that the company's responsibility thereupon came to an end. Counsel for the parties referred to the provisions of Section 22 of the Land and Income Tax Act, 1923; requiring objections to assessments of land tax to be sent to the Commissioner of Taxes not later than November 26th, 1929, but in my opinion these provisions do not apply to applications to the Commission on the ground of hardship. The Commission •did not come into existence until December sth, when the time for lodging objections under Section 22 had expired, and prior to that the only grounds upon which a reduction of the tax on the ground of hardship could be obtained were, so far as I have seen, those stated in Sections 50 and 169 of the Act of 1923. •■-■■, Section 3, subsection (1) of- the Land and Income Tax Amendment Act, 1929, authorised the appointment of a Commission to enquire and report as to any cases of hardshio that might arise from the imposition of the special land tax. Subsection (2) is as follows: "If in any such case the Commission appointed as aforesaid reports that in its opinion the payment of special land tax has entailed, or would, on "any ; fair and reasonable grounds whatsoever, entail serious ■ hardship to the taxpayer,'the Commissioner of Taxes may, in accordance with tho report of the said ,: Commission and without further authority than this section, refund the whole, or any part of the special land tax so paid or release the taxpayer wholly or in part from his liability to pay such special land tax." There is nothing in this section confining the right to apply jto the Com- j

mission to taxpayers who had given notice under Section 22 of the Act of 1923 to the Commissioner of Taxes objecting to the assessment by him, and its terms are sufficiently wide to give to every taxpayer the right to apply to the Commission appointed on December sth. It was therefore open to the defendant to place his plea for reduction or remission of the special land tax before the Commission at any time UP to about the end of January, while the Commission was sitting. He was advised to place the matter in the hands of a solicitor or an accountant for tho purpose of preparing and submitting an application, hut he did not follow this advice. From what I have said, it is plain that the defendant's pinim "for damages for negligence must faiL