SUPREME COURT

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2833, 26 July 1916, Page 11

SUPREME COURT

.;,.:;. gases on appeal. lii the Supreme Court'yesterday the Chief Justice. (Sir Eobett Stout) delivered' reserved-judgment in a case on appeal from the.-Magistrate's, decision iri 'a motor-car accident. last October. Mr. A', de 8.. Brandon and Mr. Harold W.' Brown, both driving motors-cars, in the Horokiwi Valley, collided, and' 'the former sued Mr. H. AV. Brown for j£so damages. The Magis--trate, Mr. W. G. Itiddell, S.M., gave judgment for the defendant, observing th'at both' parties.' were-, (o blame. It was from this -judgment that Mr. Brandon appealed,' and he was represented by.'Mi:.- T. W.Hislop, Mr.7.'.J. M'Grntb appearing for', the respondent. His. Honour, in his judgment, • said that 'the. Magistrate's finding :was based on the facts, and he accordingly dismiss, ed the appeal with costs. ' £o ss. " ' ' ; ,.: V . .VLAAy.iSROGBDURE... -; The case ' New--Zealand Limited, v. - Frederick Dobso'n , involved a point in law .procedure.' An 'action ..was commenced, in the Magistrate's Court in Auckland, and the defendant moved in the Supremo Court- in- Wellington 1o obtain an order removing 'th'e action into '■the Supreme Court. . The defendant did not file a statement defence, nor take any further, steps in.the action. The plaintiff, on July 5, moved in "the Supreme Court, Wellington, for an order that, the plaintiff, might at onco enter final judgment for the amount claimed, on -the gr,ound that the defendant had not filed 'a statement of defence. .. An order was made in terms of the application, and final'judgment 'was entered 'for plaintiff on July 12. The defendant moved to set-aside this judgment on the ground that the' order and judgment were made and entered without jurisdiction, and that judgment was 'obtained irregularly, and tha .plaintiff company was not entitled to enter judgment. His Honour, in refusing-to set aside the judgment, :.helcl that the Supreme Court had jurisdiction under section '51 of the Judicature Act, 1908, and' that rule 604 was applicable to tho case. He allowed plaintiff .£3 .Is. costs, but gave tho defendant leave to file his statement of defence upon filing an affidavit-stat-ing facts .which constituted a substantial ground of" defence. Mr. J. C. Peacock appeared for. .the plaintiff, and Mr. A. Gray, K.C., for the defendant.