Supreme Court EVIDENCE COMPLETED IN MOWER DISPUTE

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28979, 21 August 1959, Page 7

Supreme Court EVIDENCE COMPLETED IN MOWER DISPUTE

Evidence in the Pyramid mower dispute was completed in the Christchurch Supreme Court yesterday after the hearing had been proceeding for 108 days. Counsel’s addresses in support of the £55.623 claim and £51.608 counter-claim will begin on Monday.

The case, which arose over the manufacture of the Pyramid hydraulically-driven agricultural mower, has created several New Zealand legal records for its duration, the volume of the evidence (1.127,000 words), the number of exhibits produced 426) and the number of witnesses •33 for the defendant and 31 for the plaintiff, including six recalled in rebuttal). In its closing stages the case created another record when two witnesses were recalled to give evidence for the third time. "That’s all the evidence for the plaintiff,” said Mr R. W. Edgley (counsel for Pyramid Machines, Ltd.) as the last witness left the box.

"Well, how do we proceed now gentlemen?” asked Mr Justice Adams. ‘‘Are counsel ready to proceed with their addresses?” Mr Edgley rose to his feet to ask if counsel could be granted some indulgence in the matter of addresses. Mr R. A- Young (counsel for W. H. Price and Son. Ltd.) asked if Mr Edgley' intended to rest on pleadings in the plaintiff's statement of claim or was going to make some amendments to them. Apart from procedural amendments that might be necessary the plaintiff would rest, on the statement of claim, replied Mr Edgley. His Honour told counsel that he would not confine the addresses to the strict limits of the pleadings so long as all the matters raised were within the evidence. Mr Young said that he was “quite frankly” concerned, as with the mass of detail contained in the more than 2750 pages of evidence and several hundred exhibits it would be quite beyond any one individual to cover all the matters adequately. This could be done only by reading passages from the evidence which would occupy several days, if not weeks. “I am conscious that this hearing has occupied nearly six months and that the judicial business in the city is at a standstill,” said Mr Young. “In the ordinary course of events your Honour would take notes of what counsel said but to ask your Honour to carry out such a task has given me concern. “Would it not be better if counsel committed to paper the basis of our addresses and then submitted ourselves for argument upon such matters that your Honour deemed to be important?” he asked. “Otherwise it is possible that we could miss some points that your Honour considered important.” His Honour replied that he thought it best if counsel addressed him verbally. To read through the material before the Court with any de-

gree of care would take many weeks, he added- Any matter ne wanted to refer to would be found “here, there, and everywhere” throughout the mass of material. “We will have to be selective, all of us.” he said. His Honour said that if he had to award damages to one side or the other he might find himself in some difficulty. Mr Young suggested that his Honour defer the question of damages until he had decided on the issues. His Honour agreed to this and accepted Mr Edgley’s suggestion that the addresses be confined only to the question of liability. and that he hear addresses on the damages if necessary later.

“When would your Honour like to hear the addresses ” asked Mr Young. “Well. I am sure counsel would not want to start today,” said His Honour, adjourning the hearing to Monday.