SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 469, 30 March 1909, Page 7

SUPREME COURT.

IN DIVORCE. A sitting in pivofco was held by Mr. Justice Cooper yesterday. PATTON V. PATTON. Application was made for a decree absolute in' tho case of Ada Patten (petitioner) v. David Patton (respondent). Mr. Atkinson appeared in support of the motion. His Honour granted tho decree; petitioner to have custody of the infant child of the marriage; with leave to respondent to apply to the Court for an order for access. MUHCH V. MTJRCH. On behalf of tlio petitioner, in the caso of Ada Lucy Murch versus Georgo Francis Murch, application, was made by Mr. T. Young for a. decree absolute. It was mentioned that respondent was residing outside the Dominion. A decreo as prayed was granted, and petitioner > was given the custody of the children of tho marriage. BICKARD V. RICKARD. For petitioner, in tho ease of George Rickard v. Beatrice Amy llickard and Jas. Alex, Riokard, it was moved by Mr. Buddlo, for petitioner, that a decree absolute bo granted. Counsel stated that petitioner had custody of the child, . and respondent had care of the other. His Honour granted tho decree, and gave petitioner custody of tho infant child of the marriage, leave being reserved to both parties to apply for reasonable access to same.

IN BANKRUPTCY,

APPLICATION FOR DISCHARGES. A number of applications for discharges were considered at a sitting in Bankruptcy, held by Mr. Justico Cooper yesterday. REQUEST OF HOTELKEEPER GRANTED. . _ The first application dealt with was tliat m respect of -tho. estate of James Thomas George Edwards, hotelkeepcr, Wellington. Mr .J Cook, who appeared in support of the motion, pointed out that the report of the ' Official Assigneo was favourable. Tho Official Assignee said that he could seo no reason against the granting of the anpheation. l His Honour granted the discharge.

VICTIM OF MISFORTUNE. There was no opposition to the application of Alfred Ernest Jay, draper, Newtown, or his discharge. Debtor was represented by Mr. Moran. His Honour said that the bankrupt's position was duo purely to misfortune. A substantial dividend—l2s 4d. in tlio £—had been paid in connection with tho estate ihe creditors recommended tho discharge and tbo Official Assignee raised no objection. Mβ would make an order as prayed. MORE INFORMATION REQUIRED. With regard to tho application of Wm. M'Alley, of Wellington, for a discharge, the report of tho Official Assignee was unfavourable. Sir. Levvy, for debtor, remarked that nothing was alleged against his client. 1 His Honour: Tho liabilities total nearly £1000, and there are no assets. On the face of it closo inquiry should be made. Counsel pointed out that nono of the liabilities had been contracted during tho past eight or ten years. Debtor had tried to reduco his liabilities, but, as his creditors had again pressed him, ho had been forced to resort to the Court. His position was due to tho depression which was experienced in Tho Official Assignee alleged that debtor had run. a business belonging to his wife. Thoro was a considerable sura owing for U'agcs in her estate. Counsel: But his wifo's estate is not before tho Court. Debtor, on oath, stated that ho had no mtorest in his wife's business so far as profits were concerned. He admitted that ho had carried on negotiations for his wife. It was denied by him that his estate got into trouble through his management. His Honour said that he had not sufficient information before- him to onablo him to make au.y order. If, when a man filed, ho had liabilities totalling nearly £1000 and no assets, every inquiry must bo made. Ho would request tho Official Assignee to supply him with a detailed report on tho estate. Consideration of tho application would bo doferrod till next sittings.

APPLICATION BY TAILOR REFUSED. In connection with the application of Philip Josephs, tailor, Wellington, Mr. Hindmarsh appeared for debtorj' and Mr. Neavo to onposo on behalf of Roberts, Ltd., ono of the largest creditors, and W. Nisbet, a late partner of debtor's. His Honour said that if tho Official Assignee's report woro not disputed, lie could not possibly grant the order. Mr. Hindmarsh: I should like to dispute it. In the first place, it contains a reflection on myself His Honour: I havo nothing to do with that.. . - Counsel: Well, in tho second place, it is stated tliut dobtor is of foreign oirth. His Honour: And I have nothing to do with that. His Honour said that debtor's, liabilities totalled ivol. His assets were, returned at £314, but, after payment of tho rent of premises and other charges, there was only £10 for distribution among the creditors. Counsel: There would havo been slightly moro if it had not been that the mana<*oi mont of tho estate was placed in tho hands [of tho Official Assignee. llis Honour: Well, say, £20. Ho started business in 1905 with £7, and a guaranteed overdraft, unci his deficiency wis now over £700, dospito tho fact that two partners had put in all £335 into tho business, and taken nothing out of it. Counsel: Both pnrtners, Heley and Nisbet investigated his client's books before they joined him. A report by Messrs. Badhnm and Hiss showed that the books had been well kopt and that they could havo drawn up a balance! sheet from tho accounts. Upon oath, dobtor stated that tho money which, ho received from Heley and Nisbot wis used in tho business. Heley, who gut £160

into it, was a partner for tlireo months.' Nisbct paid £335 for bis share, kit left him after throo months, taking bills for £200, which liad not boon, mot. To Mr. Ncavo: Ho did vcprcsant"toNisbot, that the business was in a flourishing condition. It was not truo that ho know that; tho balance-sheet which was submitted to' Nisbot wag wilfully false. His Honour said that ho would bo treating tho Bankruptcy Act as n vehicle for reckless and speculative trading if, upon tho facts adduced, ho granted tho discharge. The application must bo refused. Tho Court then adjourned until- tto morning.

COURT OF APPEAL.

SITTINGS OPENED YESTERDAY. ONLY A PEW FIXTURES MADE. \ Only three Judges—their Honours Justices ■ Denniston (presiding), Edwards, and Cooper", —-wero present when the sittings of the* Court of Appeal wero opened yesterday. | A request by Mr. Baumo, K.C., that tho case of Ohinomuri Licensing Committee versus the Attorney-General and Mr. Justice' Sim should bo added to tbo list was acceded to. . It was agreed, on the motion of Mr. Lev!,' that tho case of U.S.S. Company versus Wickes, Limited, should bo taken at tho current sittings. Referring to the case which has been broHKht wiKh the object of quashing the Olimemuri licensing inquiry, Mr. Chapman," K.C., asked who.n thero would be a Full Court present. The business of tlio commission was. ho said, stopped pending tbo dociJ sion of the Court. ' j Mr. Justice Edwards: Tlio evil is supposed to have- been dono nino years ago, so tho matter can't bo very-pressing I ■ ; Counsel: It is pressing in that tho'machine cry of tho commission is idle. Mr. Justice Edwards: Mr. Justice Sim,; who appears to bo tho whole of the machin-l ory of tho commission, will not bo idloJ (Laughter.) It was agreed to fciko the cases of in ro Charles Edward Harden, barrister, and solicitor—case reserved for consideration ofi tho Court-and in ro Charles Edward Matthew—application for readmission to tho rob of solicitors—on WcoVsdav morning. Subsequently the Mowing cases, in the order given., will be. taken:—Andrew lE.! Hams v. John Tucker Ford and others—a I motion for determination jindcr. the Work-) ore Compensation for Accidents Act, and! Crespm Parker .v. I'.osinald Palmer Grevillo and Mary Jolly Edwards—an appeal from I " h " Judgment of Mr. Justice Chapman.. ' Other cases sot down are as under:— 1 Commissioner of. Stamps (appellant) versu-.i Willougbbv Criohton M1)oual, W. Horace Rose, and Kdmond Br^ier—a matter iav tho estate of Samuel. Wilson, farmer, Awamoko (deceased). J In re Oliphant Hnjrhes, of Wanganui— « motion for a new trial on a charge of al-i leeed perjury. Ohincoimri Licaisina: Committee versus tho Attornoy-General ami Mr. Justice Sim—mo-1 tion to invalidate tho commission set up toi inquivo into an allegation brought against' certain members of the eomniitfrc. ! v. Charles Baker—question reserved' by Mr. Justice Charmwn. i Rex v. Andrew Godbaz—caso stated byi Mr. Justice Chapman. I Rex v. Robert Garr—caeo reserved by Mr J Justice Edwards; ' I Palmprston North H. and C. "A". Board' versus Hawera H. and 0. A. Board—an appeal from the decision of Mr. A. D. Thorn* son S.M. - Roera Tnreha (appellant) v. R, C. Sim mi otners —motion on appeal—and U.S.S. Co. v. Wickes, Ltd.