Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CITY LEASES LAMBTON-QUAY PROPERTIES

ARE THE? TOO LOW? "UNCONSCIOUS BIAS." Corporation leases were again the subject of argument at the Supreme Court this morning, when the rehearing was continued of the motion on behalf of tho City Council that the award fixing the leases in dispute made by William Mou at Hannay, Joseph Prime Maxwell, and Alexander Macintosh (arbitrators), dated 31st October, 1913, be set aside, on the ground that "William Mouat Hannay and Alexander Macintosh had misconducted themselves in that they did not act judicially, and were biased in favour of the lessees " Eis Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) presided. Mr. T. F. Martin, with Mr. J. O'Shea, City Solicitor, appeared in support of the motion, and Mr. C. P. Skerrett,' K.C., with Mr. E. K. Kirkcaldie, for the lessees. The sections and rentals involved in the motion were: — Section 155 to Customhouse-quay, 40ft by 66ft lOin, £2 6s per foot; and section 156,, 45ft by 66ft lOin to Customhouse-quay and Brandonstreet, £3 15s per foot (Aitken, Wifeon and Co.). Sections 98, 35ft frontage to Lambtonquay, by a depth of 70l't, £5 10s per ' foot ; and section 114, 30ft frontage to Johnston-street, by a depth of 80ft (Kirkcaldie and . Stains). Section 62a, • 32ft 6in frontage to Panama-street, by a depth of 80ft, £3 per foot (Hall and Knight). Section 66a, 30ft frontage to Lambtonquay, by average depth of 80ft; part of '65a, lift 9irv frontage to Panama-street, and depth of 36ft 7in, £4 per foot (George and Kersley). Section 64a, 43ft 4in frontage to Lambton quay, by a depth of 79ft fronting Panama-street, and 66ft on the other boundary, average depth , 70ft, £5 per foot (J. B." Harcourt). When the action was previously before the Conrt, Mr. T. F. Martin, in arguing that the rentals were too low, said (that there was such a discrepancy in these leases and those paid by other tenants' for similar leases that the City Council had thought it wag its duty to bring the matter before the Court, particularly as a considerable number of valuations had yet to be heard. He alleged "unconscious bias" on the part of the arbitrators. Mr. Skerrett. for the lessees, held that to prove his case Mr. Martin must prove conscious partiality in the sense iof wilful unlairness to the corporation. This morning, in replying, Mr. Martin stated that it had been held by the other side that the gentlemen who made the valuations were valuers, and were not bound to take evidence, but were permitted to use their own judgment. In the Court of Appeal, however, it had been admitted that such men were arbitrators, and as such must take evidence. The chief point made was that the corporation must show that the bias was conscious — that the arbitrators deliberately intended to arrive at an under value. If the decisions arrived at shocked the judicial conscience, that was enough. Counsel quoted authorities in support of his argument. Mr. Skerrett asked his Honour, in his decision to take into consideration the high costs of the case. The printing alone had run to £28. Mr. Martin interjected that the corporation's costs were also high. Mr. Skerrett : I suppose, ev6n higher than oflrs. Continuing, Mr. Skerrett said it was not theduty of the Court to criticise the conclusions of the arbitrators. The sole text was' whether the conclusions drawn were (to use his learned friend's words) sufficient to shock the conscience 1 of the Court. His Honour remarked that th© case had shown how values differed. In Panama-street twelve years ago the valuers had assessed the values at £170 per foot. 1 Mr. O'Shea : That was the Post Office case. .His Honour : The values are now apparently down to £60 a. foot. Judgment waa reserved.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19140331.2.114

Bibliographic details

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVII, Issue 76, 31 March 1914, Page 8

Word Count
627

CITY LEASES LAMBTON-QUAY PROPERTIES Evening Post, Volume LXXXVII, Issue 76, 31 March 1914, Page 8

CITY LEASES LAMBTON-QUAY PROPERTIES Evening Post, Volume LXXXVII, Issue 76, 31 March 1914, Page 8