SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1544, 13 September 1912, Page 7

SUPREME COURT.

Before His Honour Mr. Justice Chapman. THE "BUEN OUT" NEAE WAIKANAE, FINDING FOE PLAINTIFF. A verdict in favonr of the plaintiff was. given in the Supreme Court yesterday, before Mr. Justice Chapman, in the action in which .£2827 10s. damages was claimed for alleged destruction •of certain flux property near .Waikanae. The plaintiff in the action was Archibald Arthur Browji, farmer and flaxtuiUer, of Waikanae. The defendants were Frank Hadfield and Ealph Hadfield, farmers, of Waikanae. Arabella Hadfield (mother of the defendants) had originally been joined as a defendant, bnt action against her was' discontinued. Mr. C. P. Rkcrrett, K.C., with him Mr. A. de Brandon, jun,, appeared for the plaintiff, while Mr. C. B. Morison, with him Mr. E. F. Hadfield, appeared for the defendants. ■ Particulars of the claim a-ud tho defence were published in Tuesday's issue. Plninhft is tho lessee of a property near Wailtanae and the licensee of flax-cutting rights on-a neighbouring property. A bigiiro occurred in the vicinity on Sunday, September 10, 1311, and it was on account of the destruction wrought to flax and other property by this fire that the notion for damages was -brought. A special jury of twelve was called for the hearing, but Mr. Skerrett mentioned at the outset that the jury would not be asked to assess tho amount of damages. It had been arranged, he said, that in the event of a verdict for the plaintiff the damages would be fixed by arbitration. lengthy evidence was heard on Monday and Tuesday, while on Wednesday four mombcrs of the special jnry, accompanied by delegates from either side, visited Waikanae to view the soeno of the "burn out." .yesterday morning was occupied with' addresses of counsel and his Hononr's summing up. The jury retired at 11.45 a.m., nnd returned to Court just before 1 p.ni. with a verdict in tho plaintiff's.favour. Tho issues submitted were answered in tho following terms:— Did tho fire, which destroyed'plaintiff's (lax, spread- from a fire lit-, by tho defendants?—" Ye."." If.so, did the defendants lieht'this fire in tire ordinary course of farming?— "Tes."; 'i If so, did the defendants take all reasonable precautions against the .same .' causing injury to plaintiff's flax?— "No." Did tho plaintiff, after feeing the fire among his flax, abstain from taking reasonable precautions to pave Euch finx from beinir burned? —"No." Could the plaintiff, by taking nny further precaution, have saved any siib- . etantial part of the said flax frem hein? burned (a) upon Messrs." Had- " field's land?—" No." (b) Upon • plaintiff's leasehold ?—"No." Judgment was accordingly entered for plaintiff, the amount of damages to be fixed by arbitration, and costs to bo fixed by tho Registrar.