Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SUBSIDENCE OF LAND

AN , EXCAVATED SECTION

INJUNCTION SOUGHT

A claim for £200 damages and an injunction to restrain quarrying operation on adjoining land was brought in the Supreme Court today by a married woman, who alleged that the excavations had caused a subsidence in her land and endangered the foundations of her house. Subsidence of part of a sandbank on the plaintiff's property was admitted.

The plaintiff was Mrs. Vera Lilus Wilson, of Raurimu (Mr. W. B. Brown), and the defendant John Theodore Grange, a carrier, of Island Bay (Mr. D. Perry), The case was heard by his Honour Mr. Justice Blair.

In her statement of claim the plaintiff said she was the owner of a hoijse and land in Sutherland Road, Kilbirinie. The defendant bought an adjoining block of land for £300, paying a deposit of £5. About January of this year, the plaintiff alleged, the defendant quarried and removed sand and soil from his land, without leaving proper or sufficient lateral support for the plaintiff's land and house. As a result, part of the plaintiff's land had subsided, and the foundations and the house had become endangered and were likely to be cracked and to fall." The land and house had consequently been greatly diminished in value, and would be further depreciated, as the defendant intended to continue his excavations.

The defendant, in his statement of defence, denied that the plaintiff was entitled to have her land and house supported by adjoining land, and denied that the removal of sand had deprived the plaintiff of proper or sufficient lateral support. He admitted that there had been a subsidence of a small part of a high bank of sand behind the plaintiff's house.

j He intended to continue excavating sand to level his property and make it suitable for a building site, continued the defendant, but had taken sufficient safeguards to prevent any further subsidence of the bank of sand. He denied that the further excavation would cause damage to the plaintiff. There was an adjournment to allow his Honour to inspect the properties. I (Proceeding.)

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19360616.2.128

Bibliographic details

Evening Post, Volume CXXI, Issue 141, 16 June 1936, Page 11

Word Count
347

SUBSIDENCE OF LAND Evening Post, Volume CXXI, Issue 141, 16 June 1936, Page 11

SUBSIDENCE OF LAND Evening Post, Volume CXXI, Issue 141, 16 June 1936, Page 11

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert