COMPENSATION COURT.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 435, 18 February 1909, Page 2

COMPENSATION COURT.

HAWEUA ELECTRIC CO. V. BOROUGH ■ » OF ELTHASI. CLAIMANTS AWARDED £400. ' Tho hearing of the claim for compensation I brought; by tue- Hawera County Electric Co, I the Borough. pf/Eltham was concluded beforo. a Compensation Court, consisting: of . r Mr. Justice Cooper and Mr. Pearce, JJI.P.. for claimants, and Mr. Boddie, assessor for yestcrdav. •' 1 • . Mr. Skerrett, K.C/(with Mr. Ostler); appeared on behalf of the claimants/ana'tho ' Attorney-General, Dr. .Findlay, K.C. (with '•Si - L.Stout), for x the.'respondents; • in-this case were that claimants. * y/ 1 authority, •:erected -works. ou} ' l\ ■ y ain S on 6P r °' stream. .. It was provided in their Act tnafc their lights were to be without prejudice to. the Municipal .Corporations • Act. Subsequently respondents, .by'virtue£pf-. : A t P rovislon s of the-Municipal Corporations Act, constructed waterworks higher up ' \ tho • stream. On the ground that,theyiwere-, liable ' to bo deprived of sufficient.water-for!the"pur-'• poses of their works, claimants .'sought to .recover £2400 from respondents way of compensation. , ; v.; -"

v <n' he - Westlon.-. at' issue," said Dr. Findlay.' - - ' ill, tho course of his. address for th© I respondents,-"is.more difficult than'any.'tKat by -tW minds subtle casuists of Ancient Greece. • The equiv- '-■" alent to the problem before the Court, is, ho ■. "'.V added, vto. ask a man placed in a' dark 'room," ; without a- light to, find a. black' hat which ia not there! (Laughter.) • •',; When the Court-resumed''at : 2 o'clock it'in- ";' .timated that it had by a majority awarded to ■' the claimants the.sum of £350 in full satis-' ; faction of their:',claim.for'compensatiori and : ' the sum of,. £50 for,;the costs of the'special - -' case and argument' in tlie Supreme' Court—in ' ' the The' award ,was f limitedr : .to the loss'flowing either presently Pr.prospec-: lively frpm, the pr^entVand future use of the'-.- ■ dam, intake,, and main. of the.- - respondents l waterworks/as how.cbhstructed.' Each'' party . - v; was ordered,to pay their own costs'-of the - « hearing: arid of the compensation! claim itselfj other-than tho £50 referred to. The assessors-. V?fees- were: fixed as :-;foUow,: /as- i; v; sessor, £18 .153.; respondents' assessor, : £24 Im. '; each, party to pay, its own- assessor.':'" - ■ His Honour, added.: that- Mr.'Boddia. assessor for-tho respondents" dissented: from. th© award, . a? he. considered that.theclaiin- ■ „ - ants had. notjestablishecl their claim sto - any . sura'by.way. ; of ; .to the sum of £50 for- costs of- t]ic case, and argument in the Supreme Court, tho ':. Court had. dealt-.with, that' matter separately, because it ,m:ght bo the subject .of a contest , towards. ;- In ,the case. of Fik:hett .v. tho' .; ■ ; ,the; Chief Justice;'' Sir: Ro- i :' ert Stout, m "dcliverinfj his judgment when a . ®®tter\was.before.'the !Dourt' of, Appeal.'stated ?.. .. tnat ..claimant -;was 'entitled, to- costs, the amount of which must, be left;to,tho Com-- . pensation_ &^rt'..::t|pori,:that.,,:questiori -.the •■ ?r / r .c # es .' la< ' VP® txpresse<l an opinion. .He: (Mr.;" Justice .Cooper) held that, there'was' ■ '• therefore : sufficient a.uthority,-for.'him;..to, de-..-'> > t] that, ;;.C6urit : . had; jurisdiction..to,'award;costs/ .The limitation ' ' wentioried;in ■ the award was .the 'limitation re- . 1. loi'rea to iiiHhe judgments of their Honour.i 1 Justice's, Williams, ; I himself, deliybred';by; himself ; 'iny'th^ ; -Full. Court. .The differerice .-in-the amo'tints awarded"'- , = to tho askssors. was. to bo.accounted.-for by, thef fact; that.' the': assessors for t-ho respond-' • cnts had.had to conie from. To which , 'necessitatedn lorigei - ; .stay;'from." hdme-and' heavier travplling expenses than, -rieces-l-,".' .' : ?ary,in the case of tho assessor for' the claim- ' ants. , y ; j;/.