Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SUPREME COURT

PATERSON V. BOROUGH OF KARORI. In the Supreme Court yesterday morning, before His Honour Air. .lustico JMwnrds, the case Andrew James Pntcrson (of Northland, engineer) v. tlie Borough of Karori, was mentioned. Mr. T. Young appeared for tho plaintiff, Mr. T. W. Hisloi>. for the defendant borough,, and Mr. V. S. K. Macassey for the AUorney-Goueral. The plaintiff claims to be a ratepayer on wliom a special rate is levied by the defondiint borough in respect of a special loaa raised for tho construction of a tramway. Ho asks for a declarer lory order dotormining the construction of the Tramways Act, 1908, .-.ml its application to the moneys received for tho working of I.lm Knrori olectric tramway, iind defining his rights as such ratepayer upon tho following questions: — (1) Must not the defendant borough apply the moneys received from the working of thn tramway in each'year to Urn payment of tho cost of maintaining the tramway in good repair and tho other matters mentioned in the Act; and in payment of interest and pinking fund in respect of tho special loan raised for the construction of the tramway hejoro transferring any surplus to any othemecount? (2) Must not the defendant borough expend all moneys received from the. working of the •tramway for the purposes specified in sections A and B of clause 1] of th'e Act heforn collecting the special Tato? '' (3) Whether the defendant borough is entitled under the Act t<l set aside the said sums, amounting to £5269 f)s. 2d., as a replacement fund whilst collecting the special rate? . (i) Has the defendant boroiieh tlie power to transfer any part of the moneys received from the working of the. tramway except in accordance with clause 11/ of the Second Schedule to the Tramways Ae.l, 3008? / The case was, hr consent of all parties, removed to the Court , of Appeal, where it will be heard-in due, course. DUNEDIN CRIMINAL- SESSIONS MUBDER. CHAB'Gti DEFERRED. ■: xi.r Telegraph.—l'ress Association. ' Dunedin, Jhv 8. . When tho criminal sittings of the Supreme Court opened' this morning, the Crown (Solicitor intimated that the murder caso would bo deferred till next sittings, owing to tho young ■woman (Ruby M'Night) alleged: to have been shot by accused- being still unable to leave, tbo hospital. The following sentences were passed: —Treavo Gardiner, breaking and entering at Oamam, ordered to be detained for reformatory treatment for not more than three years; and Lizzie Huiboit, theft of Government moneys, to como lip for sentence if called upon within twelve months, and to pay costs of the prosecution (£2 25.).

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19170509.2.79

Bibliographic details

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3079, 9 May 1917, Page 12

Word Count
430

SUPREME COURT Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3079, 9 May 1917, Page 12

SUPREME COURT Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3079, 9 May 1917, Page 12

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert