NEW TRIAL SOUGHT

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 148, 26 June 1925, Page 3

NEW TRIAL SOUGHT

CLAIM FOR WAGE -ARREARS.

; -■Argument in regard :to an application for a new trial of the case; Samuel-: Jackson y. J. J. Bourke and Co., was ■heard" by.; Mr. Justice MacGregor to-' day. The original hearing of the case took place in September, 1924, before Mr. Justice MacGregor and a jury of four. Mr. P...-.W. Jackson appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. A. W. Blair for the defendant.- - . The plaintiff's claim was for £414, the balance alleged of wages claimed to be due to plaintiff for defendant, in whose employ he was foreman 'of wool-scour-ing works from April, 1918, to October, 1923. -The case was based on the plaintiff's claim" that." liis, arrangement with the defendant was for a salary of £6, of which £2 a week was to be retained until the plaintiff needed it, the plaintiff actually receiving £4 a week, with a cottage free of relit. It was alleo-ed that an amount equalling £2 a week for 292 weeks was due to plaintiff minus amount received during 11 weeks' incapacity from work, and two sums of £50 each received by plaintiff from defendants since leaving their employ. The defendant's case, was that the salary was not, £6, but £4 a week, plus a free cottage, equal to £2 a \ week, and that the subsequent payment of £100 .was "in the nature of a bonus. The jury found for the plaintiff in the amount claimed. . .. " The application for a. new trial was on the, ground that the verdict was against■ tho weight of evidence, and new evidence had been discovered bearing on the case. " His- Honour, after hearing argument by Mr. Blair in support of the application for a; hew trial, stated that he "did not think it necessary to go into the issue that the verdict was against the weight of evidence. ' " In oral judgment liis Honour recited the main facts of the case as set before the jury, and said that lie could not see any occasion to set aside the verdict as being against the. weight of evidence On the second point 6f the discovery of now evidence, his Honour said he did jiot think a sufficient case had been made out to justify ordering a new trial. The motion for a new trial would be dismissed with costs £10 JO3. :