THE APPEAL COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 10149, 30 October 1896, Page 2

THE APPEAL COURT.

In the case Heard v. Campbell the Court affirmed the judgment of the Chief Justice and dismissed the appeal. The Court held that there was no evidence as to what would have been a reasonable time for the delivery of a policy Under the circumstances. The Court held further that the cover note was not a policy within the meaning of the covenant, or at all events not within the condition of the re-entry. In Jenkins v. the Corporation of \\ ellington the Court held unanimously that there was a right to compensation in the case of a public drain taken under private land, though without disturbance of the surface, and that the amount should be assessed at the depreciation in the selling or letting value of the land from the existence of the drain and the restriction thus imposed on the owner in the full use of the land, subject to a deduction for any increase of value arising from the executing of the drainage scheme generally. In the bankruptcy case ex parte the Official Assignee of Reimer vi re Young the Court allowed the appeal against the decision of the Chief Justice. The Court concurred in the finding of the Chief Justice on the facts, but held that as the sale to Messrs Young of the debtor's business was bona fide, and the motive of the debtor was simply to get rid of his business, the debtor had simply submitted to a deduction of his debt to Messrs Young from the purchase money as a necessary incident of the sale, and the deduction was not a fraudulent preference. WELLINGTON, October 30. The Court of Appeal delivered judgment in the remaining .cases this forenoon. In. the case Regina v. Annie Brown the Court held unanimously that neither the Court of Appeal nor the Supreme Court had any power at this stage to respite judgment or suspend execution of sentence pending appeal to the Privy Council.

In the case of the Union Bank of Australia v. Murray Aynsley a majority of the Court Judges Williams, Conolly, and Edwards—were of opinion that the judgment of Mr Justice Dennistou should be affirmed, holding that the No. 3 account of Miles and Co. with the appellant bank into which the respondent's money was piid was not a trust account, and that the bank had no notice that such were trust moneys. The Chief Justice dissented from both these conclusions. The appeal was dismissed, with costs on the highest scale. The bank obtained leave to appeal t> the Privy Council.

In the case of the Queen v. the Mayor and Councillors of Wellington, the Court held that the respondent Corporation had a statutory right to the land on which the Cabmen's Shelter was erected. The Court disagreed with the conclusion of the Chief Justice that a special Act gave the Corporation more extended powers of erecting structures on the land iu question than it had at common law in regard to any street, but that as to part of the structure it was clearly such as might be erected at common law, and as to the remainder it was a question of fact to be decided on indictment whether it materially obstructed the traffic. Costs in the Court of Appeal were allowed the Corporation on the middle scale, costs in the Supreme Court bsing left to the Supreme Court to deal with.,