DAMAGES CLAIMED

Dominion, Volume 23, Issue 169, 12 April 1930, Page 15

DAMAGES CLAIMED

GOLF AND TROTTING CLUBS SETTLEMENT REACHED Settlement by agreement was brought about in the case in which the Waiwetu Golf Club proceeded against the Wellington Trotting Club in the Supreme Court yesterday for damages on the ground that the alterations made to the Hutt Park trotting course had resulted in financial loss to the former club and prevented full use of the golf course. Mr. Justice Blair was on the bench. Mr. J. S. Hanna, with him Mr. J. D. Willis, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. D. M. Findlay, with him Mr. AV. Perry, for the defendant. The statement of claim set out that between March, 1920, and the present time, the trotting club had ploughed up large areas of that portion of the Hutt Park reserve leased to the golf club, had placed a trotting track over a large part of it, and ex.cavated other areas, and by these operations and the removal of spoil had interfered with the gold elub’s enjoyment of the lease. Since March, 1920, it was claimed, the plaintiff had lost the use of a large area of its course, and had lost a considerable sum of money owing to members resigning and others not using the course. Even after reinstatement had been carried out the coutse, it was maintained, would not be in a satisfactory condition until November, 19,32. It had been agreed between the parties that the defendant should be allowed to carry out. alterations to the trotting course on con-* dition that the alterations were completed by the end of June, 1929, that the golf club would be provided with temporary greens and fairways, and that the course would be restored to its original condition on completion of the work. The defendant continued the work until October, 1929, and then did not restore the original condition. The plaintiff claimed damages totalling £5OO, made up as follows : Loss of parts and interference with other parts of the golf course since March, 1929, until reinstatement in April. 1930, £100; estimated cost of reinstatement of golf course in April, 1930, £350; interference with use of golf course after reinstatement until November, 1032, £5O. The defence was a denial that the trotting club had interfered in any way with the golf club’s use or enjoyment of the land. In making the alterations the defendant had acted under powers delegated to it by the Hutt Park Committee. The defendant had repeatedly offered to comply with the plaintiff's requirements, and had placed all its resources at the latter’s disposal to enable the course to be properly used. Before the issue of the writ, it was maintained, the defendant had offered to reinstate or replace any greens or fairways, but the plaintiff had refused to accept the offer, and had failed to state its requirements definitely. If any agreement was made between the parties, the defendant had complied with it. As a further defence the defendant alleged that the plaintiff had failed to obtain the approval of the Hutt Park Committee to the proposed new lay-out of the golf course, and it was impossible for the defendant to provide any permanent greens or faigways until such approval was givenThe court adjourned to enable the parties to consider his Honour's suggestion that an agreement might be reached regarding the defendant’s offer to reinstate the golf course, leaving the court determine any question of daniages. for interference. The case was settled, the defendant agreeing to carry out the work and pay the plaintiff £75 in full settlement of its claim in respect to interference.