LAW REPORTS

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2499, 28 June 1915, Page 9

LAW REPORTS

COURT OF APPEAL

A FRIENDLY SOCIETY'S FUNDS,

A interpretation of the law relating to friendly societies' funds was 011 Saturday given by the Court of Appeal 011 a question raised in a special case renutted from Napier. The Bench was occupied at the hearing by their Honours tko Chief Justice (Sir Robert stout), Mr. Justice Donniston, Mr. Justice Edwards, Mr. Justice Cooper, and Mr. Justice Chapman. The plaintiffs in the case were Frederick Cook, William J. Francis, aud Charles Briggs, the trustees of the Court Heretaunga i\o. 6553, a branch of the Ancient OrF° rc6 t:ers. The defendants were \» illiam Adam Donaldson, John Kennedy, and_ Alfred Oswald Menofy, the trustees of the prinoipal society itself. J-t appeared that the principal society passed certain amendments to its rules, bearing on the sick and funeral fund. Jho plaintiffs' society (Court Horeaunga)j believing such amendments to be wholly ultra vires and void, refused to be bound by them, and the result was that the principal society purported to suspend the plaintiffs 5 society (Court Heretaunga). The Supreme Court was invoked in regard to the amended rules, and in October, 1913, the Chief Justice had declared that one of the amondiriGtt4s was ultra vires and void, but that another of the amendments was not ultra vires and void. In March, IJI4, the principal society again amended the rules, and, on the plaintiffs' society declining to comply with such amendments, the plaintiffs' sooiety was expelled as a branch of the Hawke's Bay District Ancient Order of Foresters. An action was commenced by tho plaintiffs 1 society (Court Heretaunga) to obtain a declaration that the amended rules were ultra vires and void, and that the expulsion of the plaintiffs 1 society was illegal and void. Subsequently a special caso was stated for Court of Appeal, and on Saturday their Honours decided unanimously that the rules referred to were ultra vires and void.

Mr. A. W. Blair received judgment for tie plaintiffs (the branch trustees), while Mr. H. E. Evans represented the defendants (the trustees of the principal sooiety). Tho question of costs had previously been arranged.