KENT TERRACE DISPUTE

Dominion, Volume 20, Issue 16, 14 October 1926, Page 4

KENT TERRACE DISPUTE

A FURTHER STAGE REACHED INTERIM INJUNCTION GRANTED WORK TO BE HELD UP The antagonism which lias been aroused amongst a section ot the Wellington public by the declared intention of the City Council to do away with part of the Kent Terrace Reserve bore its first fruit yesterday, when Mr. Justice Reed, in Chambers, granted an applies, tion for an interim injunction restraining the council from proceeding with the work. The application was made by Arthur Leigh Hunt, of Wellington, director; Edward Collins Jack, of Wellington, company secretary; and William Jack, also of Wefllington, accountant. The plaintiffs were represented by Mr. T. F. Martin, while the City Council’s interests were defended by the City solicitor, Mr. J. O’Shea The motion for injunction stated that the corporation proposed, without the authority of the law, to appropriate parts of the Canal Reserve in widening Kent Terrace, Cambridge Terrace, and Buckle Street, and in making a street across the reserve, and that it proposed also to cut down, in doing such work, trees and plants on the reserve. The statement of claim set out, firstly, that the plaintiffs were inhabitants of the city of Wellington. It sets out further that by section 4 of the Wellington City Reserve Act of 1871, the superintendent of the province of Wellington was directed to convey certain lands to the defendant corporation upon trust, to be used for the purpose of the public utility of the city of Wellington and its inhabitants. Among these lands was the “Canal Reserve,”, which had been known as Kent Terrace and Cambridge Terrace. The affidavit of Arthur Leigh Hunt gave information in support of the statement of claim. Mr. T. F. Martin, representing the plaintiffs, stated that on the previous day he had been informed that the proposed work had been commenced, and was going on. _ As it was impossible for an injunction to be secured at such short notice, he sent a letter to the council, asking that the work should not be proceeded with, _ as the necessary papers for the injunction were being prepared. He stated that he relied upon the council not going on with the work in this special circumstance. To be fair to the council, he offered to allow its solicitor to be present at the hearing of the application for the injunction. Mr. Martin stated that he had received no answer to his letter. However, some idea of the Mayor’s attitude could be obtained from his statements as reported by a representative of the Press. These statements gave the impression that there had been no undertaking given to stop the work. _ Though they had accepted the plaintiff’s offer to allow their solicitor _ to be present at the hearing, the civic authorities, said Mr. - Martin, had given no promise that the work would be stopped. The Other Side. Mr. J. O’Shea (city solicitor), stated that the position from the point of view of the council was that the facts, though very clear, did not seem, to be the facts as set out in tjie application and the statement of claim. The encroachments on the Kent Terrace Reserve could be placed under

three heads. The first encroachments had been made over twenty years ago Another encroachment was made last vear, for which the City Council had not obtained the necessary proclama tion “Certain ol the work which we are discussing here is being done on what 1 claim is absolutely ‘street,’ ” continued Mr. O'Shea Certain of the work, on tile other hand, was being done on the reserve. Indeed, the City Council bad been advised and had al ways been advised, that it could not proceed with anv actual street works in the reserve until it had obtained a proclamation under the Lands Act of 1924. As a matter of fa-t. continued counsel, plans were being prepared with a view to obtaining that proclam ation. , , Mr. O’Shea considered that the object of the application was for an injunction in regard, to what had been “street” for many years. Secondly, it was to prevent the council from , doing street works on what was admittedly “reserve.” That, however, the council did not propose to do. And then the plaintiffs were asking for an interim injunction to prevent the corporation from cutting cabbage trees in the reserve. He considered that it was clear law that the City Council could cut down trees growing on a reserve. “Nevertheless,” added Mr. O’Shea, “the Council has no intention of doing anv street works on the reserve until the land has been proclaimed ‘street.’ ” The Trees Question. In answer to Mr. Justice Reed, Mr. O’Shea contended that the plaintiffs had no right to ask for an injunction preventing the council cutting, down trees OU the reserve. His Honour: I do not know what rights you have in that direction. Mr. O’Shea: The City Council has the rights of the reserves. His Honour: You can discuss that when it comes before the Court. Do you say that the council can cut down trees on a reserve like this? Mr. O’Shea: Yes. His Honour: It seems rather a dangerous sort of power to give if you have a lot of vandals on the council. Mr. O’Shea; It is going to harm us, and it. is going to harm the general government. There is a serious amount of unemployment about just now, Your Honour. His Honour: 1 cannot prevent that.. If it is illegal for, the council to cut down trees on a reserve I cannot consider unemployment. . Mr. O’Shea: If the plaintiffs wish merely to get an injunction, it is really going to interfere seriously with us. His Honour then informed Mr. O Shea that he could have an early date for the hearing of the matter before the Court He did not think that a proclamation enabling the council to proceed with the work would be issued while the injunction was still wending. Mr. O’Shea: They say the City Council has started oh the work before thev have a lawful authority,. The lawful authority is a proclamation under the Lands Act. The plans are being prepared for that now. It is a public reserve. If we had waited until we had got a proclamation from the Government there would have been no ground for the action. Work Being Done. Mr. Martin, for the plaintiffs, in formed His Honour that work was already being done on the reserve He had paid a visit to Kent Terrace during the lunch hour, and had found about twelve men taking up a footpath which some time ago had been included in the reserve. From a physical point of view the footpath made up a part of the reserve, or a part of Kent Terrace. It was not so much what the council had done, however, as what they proposed to do which was concerning his clients. There were on the grounds a large number of concrete blocks, so the suggestion was that some further part of the reserve was to be taken for the purpose of m.aking a footpath. Apparently the council was going to turn the existing footpath into roadway, and was going to take a further piece of the reserve for the new footpath. If ' the council intended to take part of

the reserve in order to widen the street or to make a new ‘ootway they would have to take land on which the trees mentioned were growing. That would mean that they would have to be cut down Interim Injunction Granted. After the various arguments had been heard, His Honour stated that there were certain allegations in the plaintiffs' claim which, if proved, would entitle them to an interim injunction. “The defendant,’’ he said, ‘can file a defence and I will give vou an early trial. The interim injunction can issue simply on the information I have before me. The matter is really before me ‘ex parte,’ and therefore I shall make an order. I make an interim order for an injunction in terms of the information.” “If you file a defence,” His Honour told Mr. O’Shea. “I will give vou as early a hearing as you like—any time next week or the following week.”