COMPENSATION COURT.

Greymouth Evening Star, 18 March 1910, Page 1

COMPENSATION COURT.

WEDNESDAY. MARCH 16th, 1910.

(Before 1 His Honor Mr. Justice Chap- | man, President, and Messrs G. t'. Moss and J. P. .Maxwell, assessors). James O'Brien (claimant) v. The Minister of Public Works (respondent). Mr. Guinness and Mr. F. A. Kitchingham appeared for the claimant and Mr. llannan and Mr. J. W. Hannan for the respondent. The following is the judgment of the President of the Court :--■- "The facts out of which the objection on the ground of limitation to the jurisdiction of the Court to hear the claim arise are not in dispute. It is to be regretted that the objection was not raised at an earlier stage by motion for prohibition as I feel myself compelled to hold for reasons which 1 will slate. that all right to compensation has) ceased. j

"The claimant is either a person whose land is injuriously affected by a public work or a person' who has suffered damage from the exercise of the powers given In die Public Works Act. 1908. within the terms of Section 35. The sole question is whether this claim is barred by tho terms of Section .37. The period'fixed by that section a period of twelve months after the execution of the works out of which such claim has arisen or may arise. The work in

<!'" stion is a railway embankment. 1; was constructed by bringing down the gravel from n place on il (her side of the main line, tipping il on to ihe head of the bank and so progressive]} pushing the embankment on until Ihe river was reached. This implies that il was progressively constructed at approximately its present height and the rails were laid on il as ti progressed for the purpose of constructing it and later of constructing works beyond the bridge li is mil yet completed in such a wav as to HI it to he taken over by the I'ailway Department and it cannot be said that the N'gahere-Blackball line as authorised In law and described in the schedule in ' 'The Public Works Ac), 1908,' is yet completed, lueidontalh it was mentioned that a boiler for a coal mine was hauled over it and over the bridge beyond more fhan twelve months before the filing of the claim, but 1 <l<> tiot attach much importance to that. "T think that the proper wav to look at this section j s to consider what the claimant complains of and then to consider when everything was completed of which he can complain. In this view 'the execution of the works' must be looked upon as one phrase used to describe that out of which his claim arises. The work, the •'-•■■ ■ lion of which cause,) die damage, was the embankment constructed mil to the river, which blocked the streams flowing through and irom his land. Looking ai the mode of construction which carried forward Ihe work progressively tit a height above 11 I level, I think thai everything that did and could contribute to the damage was completed and so executed when tliis embankment reached the river.

"Nothing that was done later, or will be done hereafter, could affect the mat- 1 tor so far as this claimant and this claim aie concerned. The expression used is an ordinary expression to be construed m a popular -ease. It is quite evident that 'he subsequent completion of the ballasting of tin line can no more affeel tin.' claimant or his claim than the building of a railway station if the tiatlic should happen to require one. "The case of ('ohms., v, the Minister of Public Works 6 N.X.L.H.S.C. 650. appears to nie in principle to involve this ic-s-ult, "The case Sullivan and another v. The Mayor, etc.. ~.f the Borough of Mastcrton, 12 Gazette Law Reports 136 is really to the same effect. It is in accord with the principles Laid down m the former case though there the learned Judge had considerable dillieiilty in applying these principles to a case under a special act. ''For these reasons I think that the Court must decline jurisdiction." Mr. Guinness asked Mis Honor to adjourn the sitting of the Compensation Court till dune 20th next in order to enable the claimant !•• move the Supremo Court for e mandamus to compel (he Compensation Court to hear the claim, if hi- client should desire t.. so move, Mr. liftman offered no objection. His Honor accordittgh granlod the application and also ordered that unless the motion for a mandamus was set down ..n oi before the 31si May, 1910. the claim for compensation would be struck out.