LAW REPORTS

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 160, 31 March 1908, Page 4

LAW REPORTS

COURT OF APPEAL. CHIEF JUSTICE UNAVOIDABLY ABSENT, j /SETTLING'THE LIST/, Tbo'sittings of 'tho.Coiyt of Appeal were commenced yesterday morning. Owing to tho unavoidable absence of the Chief Justice (Sir Uobert Stout),/who is president of the Native, Land Commission,; which is holding ,sittings, in tho Auckland district/ Mr. Justice-Williams presided/Tlforo' were also ii> attendance Justices Demiiston, Edwards, Cooper, and Chapman. j Mr. Justice Williams intimated that lie had received the following telegram from tho Chief. Justice: " Regret that Native , Land Commission business will prevent mo from attending tho present sittings of/the Court." His Honour 1 said that Their Honours shared the regret of the Chief vlustice. , ADDITIONAL CASES." ' 'Applications for leave to set down additional cases woro then heard: — • ' ;• - •Mr.'Skcrrott,-K;C;, asked that tho case, Scott "V. the Exhibition Commissioners —a casb removed—should bo added to tho list. The application was granted. /-• \ Mn Skerrett,' K.C., applied to havo the case, Orford v. Moore, set ,down. Ho pointed •out that the application was subject to. tho termination of'an application for partial dispensation for security for, appeal. Counsel's request was acceded .to.-, ... ■ Mr. Myers requested- that tho; case,', Donnelly: v. 'Meinortzhagen—a caso on appealshould lie.taken at the present sittings. The application .was agreed to.. :' i ; , Mr. Devine asked that the case,; Judd v. Byrne and- Duignan—a case on appeal—.should be added to tho. list. : The Court" granted tho , application.. 1

IMPORTANT SUITS; " , Mr.' Myers rii'adb application for a fixture . for .the Otekaiko cases—M'Kellar./ v. tlio Minister/for Lands, and Mitchell."/v. ' tlio Minister' for Lands. ' Ho' stated that.'tho cases were cases removed, ayd : that.the At-torney-General . had:' suggested" Monday;. April 6. ■; Mr. Justice Williams remarked that the cases were of considerable public importance,.: and that if they could .bo .given' precedence it would be in thb'miblic jriterest. Howovor, tlio Court would not'interrupt an unfinisli-r.l case in order to hear them. The eases could be heard-"together.'" It .was decided to hoar the 'cases"oh April 6;' provided that. it. was -.convenient.//: . /'"/;','- A '• /, 'I'':)/ » : FIXTURES ' ; 'Upon the list being,' road' over in ordir to ascertain whether tlio parties in any,-of- tlio, cases wero ready . to. go on,:, Mr. -Bell, K.C., 011 . behalf -,of tho -Bar,- stated, that , members.. had : to/, apologise . for. not/being pro'pared, and would.bp glad if tlio Court:'could make tho day: an"offi'day.:,. They, proposed that the case,/ Peers ,v.!'Jl'Menaniin, should ■bo/ taken .this, morning; that tho case,. Grey Lynn Borough v. tho. King/ should be hoard to-morrow; and .that/: tlio ; case,/'.Foildiug 'Borough v. .the; Feilding ;Gas -.■'■Complinj .should bo taken next:, Foreign counsel would; :he;said, be present this.morning, when. addi-' ■■tional .fixtures /could/ be made, v Tlio Court, agreed .to take, the : casps.in. the/ order mentioned,, .and intimated;, that,/the. parties in. tho of the, King -y. Arthur Bceson'- wollld ,'have/to./bo ready 1 to ' go' oi'v this afternoon if the Cotii't;'.Wero,prepared to prococ'd with it. .■' - '' '■ N ■ ■'.-, /.;. On tho motion'' of ;Mr. 8011, K.C., the caso, Rikirangi and, ptliors 'y, :tfio/East Coast ;Conimiesioners,'was sct'down.'for hearing at the ■ conclusion of ,tho Otekailtb cases.,,/ / , , FULL LIST OF C\SES / Following 'is/a : full list''/of 'case's,'to': be" argiied' at the prbsbnt 'sittiiigs,:— v . : ' ../ ~ This Moriiing.—Peer's v.''M'Mcnariiin;' ' ' • This, Aftofn'oon.-r-Tho-King v. Arthur Boeson. • . .:-' |: /; : i';;.;///- ,/, '; .Wednesday;— Grey .'Lynn Borough v. tho King. ' „ ; , '..f:/'/;:ii i'/:. ' /Thursday'.—Feildiii'g-Borbugli'v/ the King. l ,:'. April-G.—The Otekaiko .'cases. .-J//• ':.. ' Immediately Afterwards..'— Rikirangi andothers ; ,V.:'East : Coast', Commissioners. ■ / ■

- Other cases for which- dates havo. not 1 yet been fixed: — •; .. ' .../'■ ,/■/,. /■,■ /' ■/.,.■ • Jovce v. Wood.- . ' : ■' v Reed v. Simpson. ./'/. : ' ', : /./,: .. .Judd v. Byrne;and'Duignan./■ /,/ ' ■ : Phcenix Insurance- Company v. United Insuranco Company. : Donnelly, v. -.Meiuprtzhagen. ~.'-./ . ./..,/■ . . Prydevhnd ariother.y. Drysdale.' -'/' '' : Tho King v. -W. G/. Tii'stm. ';./:.,:./ , The King v. Black and / / Tlie/King v.'Frank Sales.',' . ■ Bruce' and others V/ Waiiganui. Education Board and another. .:../. ,/./' ''; / • •: Scott v. tho .Exhibition Commissioners. •'' Orford v. Moore. "'//, ./'•, ~ / - CLAIM. FOR DEATH DUTIES. : • • QUESTION" OF COSTS.

I /The- case, Mrs. Townend v. 'tlio i Coriimis-, isioner foiyStamps-r'wliich was heard,at/the, previous sittings—was mentioned. ••' :/:•''/!- / , Mr. .Skerrett, K.C.,' who. represents Mrs.. Townend, stated that:only three, points wero left undetermined. , Tho first.had: reference to a doubt: which arosb" in ' thb mind of Mr. Justico.iVilliams./as .to jivdiether'tho j use of /certain expressions in the accountant's report ■■ meant to convoy' that, .cortairi transfers; ■of securitibs ,wero merely . offbeted .by - book entries.' ' , Mr. Myers, who was /acting 'oil. behalf Of tho Crown, had informed him. that: /investigations which, had .been!'.mado went. ,t.o; shoiy..that all the. transfers ..in question; woro 1 iact'ual and in fact.',. Tho . second 'matter/was the important : question' of ; costs;' I :which, had: not yet: been;dealt with.by the, Court. There /wero two proceedings moved .into/tho'Court, —the. fust an appeal by tho Commissioner, and .the second .a: petition under, the /De-/ ceased Persons'.Estates, Dtities Act, .1881, asking the, Court;.'to. declare that certain traii'sactioris were mado' for ,'thb purpose- of evading .tho;payment/pf:.diity/.yCounsel submitted that costs should be allowed on both proceedings. The limit- of-' cost's which , tho Co.nrt could allow in la' caso was, 110 ' stated, incompatible' with .its-.dignity., Tho/.greatest .amount it could' award: was £60, with an extra, aljowanco of, £30 'for , costs as from a distance.' The amount .'involved in the\present ciise was'£2o,ooo, and,''tbo' Court should allow adequate costs, i.e.; costs on both proceedings— in all, £180. " i Mr/: Justico . Demiiston: Did you iriean .coiripat.iblo.witK the; dignity'of tho Coiirt Pr with thb dignity .of. tlio. caso?- .. Mr. Skcrrott : I. don't care, whiph.'/ Mr. Justice Deniiiston: So long" as you got yoijr costs?, , ,-. . Mr. .Skerrett: Yes, .(Laughter*,) . Continucounsel' stated, that,,in, regard/to tlio. third point—the terms.'.of- appeal/ to', tho I nvy .Council-Mr./. Myers ■ arid lie. were agreed. ~,.-. , i

.Air. Myors, ou behalf of. tiie''Commissiorier of Stamps stated that the Deptuy-Commis-sionor for-Stamps mado an investigation with rcfercnco to, tho transfers in dispute which represented the suhi of ,£432,222, ant hjid ; found that at: tho death of Mrs.-Town-end s father they woro represented by actual: securities 111 tho name'of Mrs/Townend Jlr. Justico Milhains: Tho fact should be re 1 , t,he , uasc >' also "a statement to the oltect that roferonco to/the siibjoet in mv judgment should be ignored. . ' ' / , Mr. Jlvors pointed put that lie would sup: E! y qtuon Ree,Strar a r Clf rt Continuing, Mr. Myors submitted that' as to the quostion of costs no'doubt Mrs'. "rownwith'tli'nTi 1 - r B( !", ,otllin S in: connection with tho taking of ovidelico 111 the Supreme Court at -Christchurch,' and then in connection with tbo proceedings in. the: Appeal Oourt. Howovor, she was not entitled to two sets of costs'in connection with the petition and the appeal. The evidence taken on. tho.one. case.had been made "use of iri the other,'and tho proceedings had been printed aiid argued together. In.support of his contentions-counsel oited the .case of Williams,.v. tho Commissioner of .Stamps, in wh'ich only ono set of costs was nlibivcd. ■ 1 Mr, Justico Donuistori: How long did tho case take?

Mr., Myers: Two days, Your Honour. Mr.'Justice-Dcnniston: Only, two days! My impression of tho case was that argument tpok much longer! (Laughter.) Continuing, counsel stated that in connection with tho appeal to the Privy Council it had boon arranged that tlio question of security for. costs should be waived. Mr. Skerrett, in reply, contended that the two sots of proceedings were distinct, and that counsel would have, been entitled to lia've asked that the. petition and appeal bo dealt with separately.■■ . • ' ; :... . Mr. Justicp Demiiston: This is a case in regard -to which there should bo a liberal construction under the Interpretation Act, I suppose! - _ The_ Court held that it; was a caso in which two sots of costs should bo allowed. If only one set were,awarded, tho successful party would Jiot be sufficiently 'indemnified. 'The importance of tlio case and the length of argument had been .taken into consideration. . -Further,, it was held that there was a raised on the appeal which was not raised on tho petition, viz., whether the transactions in question were complete- gifts in the lifetime of Mr. Moore. The question involved a considerable amount of argument,: and was of itself of- great importance. The two cases were not really identical, 1 and fdr these reasons two sets of costs 011 the' highest' soale, arid as from a distance, would be allowed. , Mr. Skerrett:; I presume that the matter' of costs. in connection with the takin"-' of evidenco in the Supremo Court will bo referred to tile Registrar? .. Mr. Justice That is so, and the appeal will go to the l'rivy Council, as arranged. ' . ' . . • The Court then adjourned until 10.30 this .morning. • > . •