LAW REFORM BILL

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 303, 18 September 1936, Page 10

LAW REFORM BILL

Anomalies Being Removed MEASURE APPROVED BY PROFESSION i A statement that the Law Reform Bill would modify or abolish many old rules of law that were inconsistent with modern ideas was made by the Attorney-General, Hon. H. G. R. Mason, when moving the committal of the Bill in the House ot Representatives yesterday. The Bill, he said, would undoubtedly improve the administration of justice in this country, and remedy certain difficulties in cases where a remedy was clearly called for. Mr. Mason explained that many of the points dealt with in the Bill had been the subject of discussion in England by a most influential committee presided over by the late Master of the Rolls, Lord Hanworth. The Bill, in fact, was built on the work done by that committee. Reference was made by Mr. Mason to the section of the Bill which abrogates with certain expressed provisions the rule that the personal representative of a deceased person cannot sue or be sued in respect of a wrong committed against or by the deceased during his lifetime. By way of specific example he quoted the case of a motor-vehicle causing injury to someone on the road' and the wrong-doer himself being killed. In such circumstances there was no remedy at law for an injury that accrued to anyone else, for the reason that there was no one to sue. „ „ w The Minister of Lands, Hon. I’. Langstone: He has gone to another place. . , , Mr. Mason: Yes, a writ cannot be taken where that gentleman has gone to. The net result is that the person wronged has no remedy, and the injustice of that will be clear.

Definition of “Child.”

Dealing with the section of the Bill extending the definition of “child” under the Deaths by Accidents Lornpehsation Act so as to include illegitimate and adopted children, Mr. Mason said that under the existing law an illegitimate child would have certain rights in the event of the death of its parents, but the mother would have no right in respect of the death of her child. That was illogical, and the Bill removed that doubtless unintended provision. Whether the child was legitimate or illegitimate, no legal remedy was lost. The substantial elements of the Bin, said the Minister, were very much desired by the le S al Profession as being necessary for the administration of justice The profession felt that there were certain difficulties in making nontechnical men understand the need and urgency of attention to matters of the description covered by the Bill. Injustice occurred, and the general belief was that the lawyers or the courts were to blame. There were technical rules of law dating from times past when circumstances were different, and they remained unless removed by the House. The Minister thanked the legal profession, the legal members of the House,.and the members of the Statutes Revision Committee for the assistance he had received from them in connection with the Bill. Measure Welcomed.

Praise for the Bill was given by Mr. W. A. Bodkin (Opposition, Central Otago), who commended the AttorneyGeneral for the reforms embodied in the measure. Mr, F. W. Schramm (Government, Auckland East) said there was nothing in the Bill to which exception cduld be taken by anyone. The legal profession had approved it through the New Zealand Law Society. Mr; W. P. Endeau (Opposition, Parnell) also complimented the AttorneyGeneral on the introduction of reforms which were manj r years overdue. Most of the provisions, he said, followed reforms instituted in Great Britain. Mr T H. McCombs (Government, Lyttelton) said the Bill corrected legal anomalies that had existed for many years. ‘ , Replying to the debate, the Minister said that he hoped at a very early date, although not during this session, to prepare a Bill dealing with motor accident insurance. The motion for the committal of tho Bill was carried. It was put through the remaining stages without much discussion and was passed with minor technical amendments.