ROAD BOARD RATES.

Gisborne Times, Volume VI, Issue 173, 2 August 1901, Page 4

ROAD BOARD RATES.

SPECIAL BATES TO BE PAID ON VALUATION BOLL.

At the Magistrate’s Court yesterday Mr Barton, S.M., gave the following judgment in the ease Whataupoko Road Board v. Alice Lewis:—This is an action to recover from the defendant the sum of L'3 10s od for rates upon section 49, Mangapapa, for the years IS9S (<£l Is 3d), 1899 (~£l Is lid), 1900 (£1 3s 3d). First, it was contended by counsel for the defendant that whether the rateable value of the land increased or decreased the property must still pay the rate according to the original value, that is, the value at the time the rate was first struck, and that the valuation must remain the same for the full term of 26 years, and cannot De altered in accordance with increased value year by year. Second, that the rates for the years 189 S aud 1599 being more than two years overdue arc not recoverable. Third, that all demands for rates must bo signed by the collector duly appointed, and that the printing of tho collector’s name at the foot of the demand is insufficient. In reference to the first point, I am of opinion that the special rate is payable according to the value of the property as appearing in the valuation roll, and that the Board in striking the rate from year to year must bo guided as to the value of properties by the valuation roll in force for the time being, and not by the original value when the rate was first struck. With regard to the second point, it appears to me that section 61 of the Bating Act, 1894, has general application to all rates, and that being so, I am precluded from entering up judgment for rates moro than two years overdue. As to the third point, I am of opinion that a demand for rates with the name of the collector printed at the foot is not a complianeo with the provision of section 46 of tho .Bating Act, 1894, and that such a demand must be authenticated in some way by the hand of the person duly appointed by the local authority as collector. The body of the demand may be written or printed, but I think it must be signed by the collector to make it valid. Judgment will therefore bo for plaintiff for HI 3s 3d, being rates for the year 1900, the last item of the claim. As to tho question of costs, the question raised by tho defendant in this case was very debatable, and not by any means free from doubt, and for that reason I shall not allow any solicitor’s feo against tho defendant. In my opinion, she was quito justified in setting up tho defence she did. Leave to appeal was granted on the application of Mr B. N. Jones, who appeared for tho defence.