Magistrate’s Court.

Cromwell Argus, Volume L, Issue 2615, 17 March 1919, Page 5

Magistrate’s Court.

WEDNESDAY. 12th MARCH. Before Mr H, A. \ouug, S.M. Thomas Farrell, u prohibited person, charged with being found on licensed premises, was fined .£3 and costs, in default 11 days. Sergt. M'Glone prosecuted. H. D. Young (Mr M‘Kean), proceeded against R D. Poison (Mr Brodrick). under section 55 of the Stock Act, for failing to give notice of his intention to muster the sheep on his property. Summarised the position was that litigants were adjoining landowners. Plaintiff notified defendant of his intention to lamb-mark and defendant was present to see the flock mustered. Plaintiff claimed that defendant had failed to give similar notice. He (plaintiff) had sent a registered letter to defendant asking to he notified when »hp "as marking, shearing, dipping, or selling any sheep. Plaintift admitted that he had been notified verbally, and indirectly, but did not consider this proper notice under the Act. He had not been given an opportunity to inspect defendant’s flock, and was only notified that some of his sheep, were in defendant’s yards, and refused to take same until ho had a full muster. Defendant stated that he could muster his whole flock in two hours and was willing to do so any time. Mr Brodrick, for the defence, contended that either written or verbal notice was sufficient.

After hearing lengthy evidence the Magistrate held that the notice served on Poison did not conform with the Act, and was not sufficient ground for an information. The information would be dismissed, with costs £2 2s, against plaintiff.