THE APPEAL COURT.

Evening Star, Volume 12869, Issue 12869, 19 July 1906, Page 1

THE APPEAL COURT.

Tie Appeal Court were yesterday occuss 1 (w 8 - of ami 00. v. Arthur Keeee. Appellants -u« SSKt™. was T .««*- apprenticed, but walked for wages La 1902 an award Mas ™& by the Arbitration Court S «£ wage of printers' employees': and the appellants were parties to this award, ihe respondent continued in their employ for two years after the award, receiving le4 than the minimum, stated iri the award; but no contract was made by him to tafce less than the minimum rate, and the. appellant did not comply with the pnivkkhis of the Act which allow a lowr rate to be paid in certain casea The appellants had been nned f or a breach of and no portion was paid to tho respondent, wfco began an action clainang £sl 16s, the d-fference between his rate of pay and tho minimum wage in tho award. The maristrate at Pahiatua decided against him, but m the Supreme Court the Chief Justice held that the respondent was entitled to recover. It was from this latter decision that the ap. peal was now made. The casj raises j very important question, and is tho first oi its kind in the colony. Tho Ar&tratkai Oourt have been in the habit, when fininc employers for paying less than tho mimmiUH fixed by an award, of ordering part or th« whole of the fine to bo paid to the employee, and it b generally considered that the employee has no further remedy. If the Chief Justice's decision is upheld every employee paid less than the minimum wages « y the Arbitration .Court in his case will be able to bring an action to recover the balance, and the result would iovolwj much litigation. Judgment was reserved.