Privy Council resolves ‘hanging fees’ case

Press, 16 June 1983, Page 7

Privy Council resolves ‘hanging fees’ case

The Christchurch abattoirs hanging fee case has been finally settled by the Privy Council in London in favour of the Canterbury Bye-Products Company, Ltd, now known as C.B.P. Industries, Ltd, which is in receivership. The Canterbury Bye-Pro-ducts Company claimed that William David Wiseman, an accountant, was liable to pay the company “hanging fees” for stock he had killed outside the company’s district but sold within it. The Bye-Products Company never saw or handled that meat. The claim was a test case and the outcome involved other persons and companies. It arose from section 16 of the Meat Act, 1939, regarding the obligation of the local body to provide an abattoir for the killing of meat.

The Christchurch City ,Council handed over its responsibilities and powers to the Bye-Products Company.

In 1950 that company, acting under the powers granted to it by the council under the deed of delegation, made rules for charges known as “hanging fees” for meat sold for consumption within its district but slaughtered outside it. Those rules were approved by the Minister.

The deed of delegation lapsed through oversight between October, 1960, and October, 1961, and September, 1970, to May, 1973. During those two periods there was no formal deed of delegation from the council to the company. In 1979 the company sought a declaration in the High Court that Mr Wiseman was liable to pay “hanging fees” for meat he had killed outside the company’s district but sold within it. The case was heard on February 18 and April 22, 1980, before Mr Justice Cook. Mr J. G. Fogarty appeared for the company,

and Mr A. A. P. Willy for Mr Wiseman. Mr Justice Cook held that the “hanging fees" rule could only be enforced in those periods when the company was in law the controlling authority. The case was taken to the Court of Appeal with the same counsel appearing and it was held in a unanimous decision by Mr Justice Richmond, Mr Justice McMullin and Mr Justice Quilliam that the fees were enforcible for the whole period and the appeal against Mr Justice Cook’s decision was allowed and his judgment was set aside.

Earlier this year the matter was argued before the Privy Council with Mr Willy again appearing for Mr Wiseman, and Mr Fogarty for the company. On the bench were Lord Diplock; who delivered the judgment, Lord Wilberforce, Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Templeman and Sir John Megaw.

Their Lordships unanimously upheld the decision of the New Zealand Court of Appeal and dismissed Mr Wiseman's appeal.

It was ruled by their Lordships that the Court of Appeal was correct in holding that the rules made by the company in 1950, as varied from time to time by the company with the approval of the council and the Minister, during the three delegation deeds, were valid and were in force during the period in which the company sought to recover hanging fees from Mr Wiseman.

“Their Lordships were not concerned with the variations made to the rules during either of the two gaps in the deed of delegation, during the second of which, at any rate, there was no delegation deed in force. They had heard no argument and must not be taken as expressing any opinion on that topic,” Lord Diplock said.