LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 630, 6 October 1909, Page 4

LAW REPORTS.

-;tt;^^SUPREME,COUftT. ; ' ''■'»' :;. 0;/ : ,;LIBEL ACTION PENDING. -"': ' vAfcai.GhtimbeWiSittinßi.of tho Supreme Court 'yejttrdijf7.ffl6rnirig]l : Wore ;Mr. -Justice Chapman;-' Mr- made application for an; extension .of the,time allowed in which ! fo. give' security: for; costs in the action, Thomas William VArtar: v.. Albort Ernest Louis Bbrtling. -CoTliijiel-'fetafetl that his client (the plaintiff) was in'Brisliancv'and the time had not been sufficient toienable.fthe ..security - (£70),. to. bo, .furnished.. •It cbuld'be obtained within'.fourteen' days'from 'Qetbo-er-l; '■■■■ : i» Defondantv-Beitling, 19.superintendent of the • Zoo; ' aha,.' Arthur . was'." employed lindov'-him-^-lt-is. alleged,.that .some' jealousy. oxistecUbetween. the'.-, two employees,'. and that Arthur, applied,,to. bo'removed, from work at .the*ZopVy;H6ywa3/app6ihted' to' a .position at the, Botfi'nical Gardens, and it is. affirmed that he.-'iesighed .for the. purpose of. going Home. Jusf as he" was leaving; he heard' that a man was/wanted 1 for the '.-.'-'Zoo'?. at Brisbane, and he.told' that he was.applying for the • position;..;?Berthrig, 'plaintiff- alleges, wrote; to J. Beard;! of .the Longendale .'• poultry farm, Mooroolta', :neaf?Brisbane; stating.- that Arthur -for incompetence, .'imper-and'misohief-making. The action is .for^JM^daniages./r'Vi.■.;,:-•-;.v • : " , ;,Mr.-.;Sharp,- objected :•, to • an extension until 'tho' fourteenth;- hsruhdorstobd that plaintiff ro<!(uired..'-6hlyi,avfeWv,'days;'' ; -/ : ; -';': ■■•'• ,His. Honour.:r,emaried ithat it: would make '.noidiSertnce'so-far* as the hearing '~was "■■ con-'ftnrnedV''<j'n.''i.>';;'.-.;''i'.':-;iV''-. .:,.■■:;■• '',•.-•■'■"'■•.. :•■ : Mri, Petherick,: Said V that defendant - had .threatened.;.a .counter:* claim on account of published in Wellington. • '• Mr.;; Sharp:: There is! nothing before your Hononr-rogftrdlng. that, •■■. -~-.■»: ■ ■..:,:,■.; ':.<'. His Honour/granted ah- extension until the fourteenth, andv ordered- ;that,i if the security :wtis*:-nbt deposited-within, that .time,, the- action 'sh'bnldistend. dismissed.-:-One guinea' costs were , allowed .So' the;-defendant.? :•':•:,- -■-- QUOTED. i Atibther lease which cams before Mr: Justice ChaprAan%Ss-the . Hutt '■ Valley Timber -Com-pany;v.-Alico of Henry 'Kibblewhiter bnilder,■'.; of ;Petone. Mr. A." L. •Herdmah.(oh bohalf of Mr.'M'Grath) appeared for plaintiffs, Ohd Mr. Arnold (for Mr. Douglas);,. supported- a ;motion.by. defendant to have '.thap.cliim^disjKissed.'■'.-.- '.'&■ • -■■••■'. , r -'sArapld','6aid jthat. the'defendant had a hops.6l.orec.tsd iat P.etone.-and the plaintiff - com-.pany.suppJUed;-the;.Hmber. /The company-had issued;.'a. Summons;.;, and lodged: a lienfor the :;ram moved -that claim;-should be dismissed, an'drthe :hen cancelled;- ■> One of; the grounds ..which,; counsel/.submitted in -.- support of the motion: .wAs.!th&t ; :'t.he claim :was laid:under a WOCialActof Parliament, the Contractors' and Workmen's 1 Lien ;:Act,,;;1908,; which had Oliver eastea.';^;-■-■-.•■'---.?■<,-•-• ; ,.--:.,■:■ ■ ■-.-'■:■.-■. mistake is -that -we .ham,pntaa;-.'*Woß" -.instead of :"1892." "' -.-■■ ; ■" >■■•:. Mr.- ; Aiwold 'jointed*'6uti;th«.t'-.-the legislation ■ was now. called the Wages .Protection ;and Contractors' . .Lien-'-Act;,; 19Q8»- '1 ■'-■'■■ :.-:.':,' v ;'.:' ;.:-His , A Honour.r Need>ftiiy{..A'ct be/mehtioned at.:all?j-v'.:---.'i',■,;,''-'.--r" ; ::.: --■:-,:.,-;,'.■'-.-; •"Mr; Arnold:'Yes,'you* Honour.. ,', ; ''.Was.-.fanyone-misled;.by;.the- erroneous desicnatibn'.oftho. Aot?.:/,v', ■&!,':■''- -/■■;-,/ ;-'■■-■ •-■"• i."-1, .submit; sir,/tha't-. : wp..,a're: entitled-to "raise .this taken proceedings under: tho ■■-■.-.■ ■:-■-.: ■; -.Unless yon; can * satisfy me; that' it was , ab,'solnt?ly/,ne(cessary,;to mention tho' Act, I should : Bay. ifcis/then:necessary;'to\show :that someone V.&f; misled, otherwise I should not attach any importance to:the-error;"because any., profe'sslonal.,'roari',:.wOUld'Psee.,it;.directly,;ho came' to :lo6k : at,the':Act.^;:' ; :: v, :;::;, ' :-r- ' ~'/, Afjter.!;further.^argument',the-! case .; wa3 :-^ : 'mM^thß'.'.Bani;))i'list,: in-; order.: that Evidence' ! might De;takeh:whe'nit ; came(to'be.heard. '■','. ,:j:|||;l§|rg|ANdb; 0 %{& '■ "BATES.:; ■' ■-■Che dispute-between the ratepayers of North- ; i litid-'ahd tTC'Kar6ri'B6fough,Council regarding" I th« ; 'jiafrflerltii6ffßp'«cial-''r&tes ,was .discussed -yesteWijr.iktl.7 * -BihcoVsittiug .-'of .the ■; Supreme' -...- Sfiy'-iiiyyulvfio no■■-.;'■-■■;;•' :-,-.;■,' ■:.

Court, over which Mr. Justice Cooper presided. Ihe was in the form of an appeal from a recent decision of., Dr. M'Arthur,.S.M. : The appellant, '• Charles 'Andorson,--' glass-. worker, of Garden, Road, Northland, was'reprosentcd by Mr. T. W. Hislop, and Mr. Martin appeared for the respondents, the Mayor, counburgesses of the Borough of Karori. had been" taken in' the Magistrato'i Court on August 6.for the recovery of special, rates made over the whole of the borough'of Karori, nnd the property in respect to which the case was brought had been included in the .city of Wellington; Defendant'(now' appollnnt) had disputed his liability to'.pay the ; ratos sued. for. It was admitted at the hearing that the special loans were raised from private sources, and not from tho Minister for Finance; Judgment had been entered by-the magistrate for the rates sued for Os.), and costs (.£2 11s.). The question to be decided by the Supreme Court was whether this judgment was t good in;point of : law. ,'>•<■:■. .; ,Mr. Martin said that the case had arisen out,of the' inclusion,in the city of Wellington of part of the borough of Karori. Certain special rates had been levied oh the whole of •the borough, and tho question arose,, as to which local authority could legally recover the. rates of that part of the borough now' included in' the city of Wellington.' It was a test case, which was being defonded by ;the Northland Ratepayers'; Association. The ratepayers did not 'rctuso to' pay their rates, but they considered that this-question should be determined first.' It; appeared that the statute had not been compiled with, which ,' made. provision that, on the inclusion Of part of one borough jfithin the limits: of another, the-local bodies 'concerned should come to anagreementas to.assets and- liabilities, and failing suoh an agreement being arrived at within three months, the Auditor-General," or someone appointed by him, should make the.: adjustment. Tho three months had long since gono by, and the/adjustment had not been made. ..Coming to'the law points, Mr- Martin contended that the rate demand was not in order, .because-(1) -it , did not state whether the rato was demanded •from - the appellant in the capacity of owner or occupier,-(2) the period for which the rats was "payable was pot properly stated, (8) de-: inand was not. made for the correct period, in: accordance with the rate struck'. The' ratepayer, : oven apart'_ from the statute, was entitled to correct information concerning the rate which. he',- was asked, to pay; it was a commop. law principle.: Counsel -pointed out ,thiit this was not tho "kind-of defence' which would bo. made''if the action were merely for the collection of rates. Tho Northland ratepayers could, not approach the Karori Borough Council at present, because they were out of its jurisdiction, >nd, if they went.to -the -Weilisten .City CCuncil," that corporation■ sajd that it did. not' know whether, it- wa?: .able, to collect the rates. Under these: circumstances, .the ratepayers were entitled to make any oblection. ;It was 'contended . that the'' Karori Borough Council- had not: :powcr,' to collect tho, .rates after the inclusion • of the ■ district K l cit y boundaries. Counsel submitted that the power rested with the- -Wellington City Council,. or. that,' pending an adjustment, no one had the''power to collect these rates. '.This, said.Mr.,Martin,:was at the root of tho whole of the,rating-law of tho Dominion. A local authority had jurisdiction only in its-own aTea.; rExpressed: enactment ought- to bo found in order to give, a local authority power to do anything in; the nature," of municipal jurisdiction oufeide'. its' district, . and within tho district of another local bodyr ■'-.'•■ ' . '- • .- v M r.-Hislop.submitted that.thoro was nothing, in the argument of opposing counsel regarding the form of the rate demand. ■ As long 'as the word occupier"-remained,,that was sufficient; tie presence of .the word, "owner" as well did not,matter.. The levying of a special.rate must Be .-.taken - m a j'jcommon-sonse. .way.-, There - was nothing to. show that the rate should bo payable at the l-eginning: of the year,:;and,-for the, of convenience,- it had been' collected alongwith the.-other rates.. Counsel held that the'rate demand,was in :order, and gave a common-sonso statomont, of the rates payable The Karori Borough Council ;had the-'Uiability, and ho hoped that tho-.Court "would,a , ssist.:tliat body, and. preWnt; this/local "societV-'frohi*-{& terioring with jits.niability.- ThoMistrictt-over-which- a, local Sody - had jurisdifji^. A !f S,Hike area oyer which ,-its power to levy "rates ex-" jtonde'd.'•",-■•;.'■•'•¥'•''"■;''.'. ' "-'.-:.-. :■-. , -.His Honour:?.; Supposing -this deadlock' continues, tho Karori-Borough: Council declines to.rnake ony.,,Brrangem6nt 'with, the city/ the city will not approach the bbrough council.'ana the Governor says, "I do not see why I should stop injaiidniake an adjustment,"4he sinking fund meantime is not majjitiiricfl;'Th6 debenture-holders imightapply-'fe'the.Snpretnfi Court by petition- for relief, and tho judgo has power to o'rder a; receiver. Someone, must

bo served with, the legal proceedings. The Wellington Corporation is apparently under no liability; tho Karori Borough Council would ba-'served; '■_'■■ f .' "'..;■'':.■."'' :•'■-..':'. '-.'.'.' . . , Mr,. Hislop: The, local. bodies. doi, not think. there is anything to adjust." His Honour (to Mr. Martin): Tho party in default' is the body which originally borrowed the money. There must bo sonio way-out.of-the difficulty. I cannot accept your proposition that theso rates are like Mahomefs coffin, suspended between heaven and earth, that nobody can collect'them. There ; must; be some authority,'to."collect them, and: 'either,.the ; Karori Borough: Council or the Wellington City Council must', have it. .' •'-- ' Mr. Martin: I think the Wellington City Council-is the proper body. Our position may bo wrong, but.it is quite simple.. .In a,sense they striko the rate year hy year, and the I Wellington City Council should have stuck it. At the.conclusion of argument, judgment was reserved; -...- .".',..... .< ' -