Feiday, December 11. (Before His Honor Mr Justice Stringer and Messrs Scott and M'Cullongh.) John Duncan M’Donald (Mr Hay) claimed £ll7 16s and costs from William Nees and Co., Ltd., furniture manufacturers (Mr Hanlon), in respect of the death of his son. Mr Hay said the facts were that Archibald James M’Donald, son of the plaintiff, met with personal injury in an accident while in the employ of the defendants, by which his hand was injured, and as a result of which he died about a year after. Tho deceased had contributed materially to the household expenses, and there were three children partially dependent on him Defendants paid to deceased prior to his death £175 18s 9d, and the claim was made tip of £ll7 16s. funeral expenses, and £IOO over and above. Ellen M’Donald, wife of the plaintiff, gave corroborative evidence of the farts as detailed by Mr Hay. Her son’s wages were a necessary part of the household income. Her husband earned £2 10s a week, and there were two children earning small wages, as well as three dependent. Tho sum of 22s 6d a week was being paid off on a house which was being bought. The sum of £65 was paid off on a £7O piano, and articles of furniture were also bought. A sum for burial expenses was obtained from the Hibernian Society. Tho deceased gave her all his wages, and she bought all his clothes and allowed him 2s a week Plaintiff also gave evidence of .a corroborative character. Mr Hanlon said that the evidence clearly showe.d that the plaintiff and his wife had expended money they had ob:taiiicd in a manner which demonstrated that they had not been so dependent on the deceased as they contended. The fact that they attempted to obtain monev for funeral expenses when these had already been paid by the Hibernian Society, was significant. It was absurd to suppose that a boy of 20, earning £2 10s a week, would allow his mother to buy his clothes, and be content with 2s a week. Messrs Hay and Hanlon addressed tho Court on the legal aspects of the case. His Honor said that there seemed no doubt that the deceased made a substantial contribution to the family purse during his life, and although the money obtained had not been spent in the best way, still he thought that something else should be allowed. The defendant would therefore be granted an additional £45, and also £ls for funeral expenses, with costs (£5 ss), witnesses’ expenses and disbursements.
Permanent link to this item
ARBITRATION COURT, Evening Star, Issue 15674, 12 December 1914
ARBITRATION COURT Evening Star, Issue 15674, 12 December 1914
Using This Item
Allied Press Ltd is the copyright owner for the Evening Star. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons New Zealand BY-NC-SA licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Allied Press Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.