DAMAGES AWARDED

Grey River Argus, 29 July 1925, Page 8

DAMAGES AWARDED

STEEL—OGILVIE CASE. MAGISTERIAL decision. Tire case in which Andrew Steel, of Blakctown, proceeded against William Ogilvie and Co., Sawmillers, of Marsden, for the sum of £95, representing damage alleged to be caused to plaintiff's fa? nt property at Marsden, was concluded in the Magistrate s Court yesterday, before Mr. W. Meldrum, S.M. " lien the case first came on for hearing on June 30th., last, the facts set forth were that four years ago, plaintiff acquired tli e property a-t Marsden, and/ flefendaiit’s company constructed tnree tramlines thereon for the purpose of running timber to their mill. A considerable quantity of gravel was used in the construction of the tramline and plaintiff alleged tliaft, through illrb negligence of the defendant in leaving the gravel there after the lines were removed gorse, had been and was still, springing up through the gravel Previously the land had been rec from gravel. Th s defence was that only one tram line was situated within the boundary of plaintiff's property, and that was Branch Cl, where very little gorse was growing. Tile evidence of James Stewart Ford, Surveyor's assistant, wa s taken. This was to the effect that the tramways were not i n plaintiff’s property.

The case was then adjourned to allow ar.other survey being made. Lbn the case came up for hearing yesterday morning, counsel called "Henry Spencer Nightingale, licensed surveyor, who said he had made an inspection of the land on July Bth. last. Witness found that the corner peg was the proper peg. There was a little gorse on the main tramline. Tram B. was well covered with garse but there was no sign of any on Tram O, as far as witness remembered. There was no sign of gors e on rny other portion of the land. The tramways B. and C. had been pulled up, the gravel remaining there. To Mr. Hannan: The cutting of thS gorse on the tramway formation would take about a couple of days. To His Worship: Very little grass was growing on the tramlines.

His Worship, in summing vp, stated that the land was subject to tram rights, therefore he could not allow anything to plaintiff on the score of trespass, With regard to the removal of the gravel, His Worship stated it was questionable whether the owner had intended to cultivate it. It did not appear to his Worship that the owner intended doing so, as no fences had been put up, so no appreciable damage had been done.. Referring to the question of gorse, hi.s Worship said it was not the gorse now on the land that was the trouble —it wa s the keeping down of the growth. He estimated the clearing of the gorse would occupy one man five days, while in another three years the subsequent cutting would occupy two and a half days. Mr. Joyce had asked that the cost of making the survey be considered when the damages were awarded, but his Worship failed to sec how such could ba done. Judgment would be for plaintiff for 10s, iniluding £1 damage to hind by gravel, with cost.', /jl 14s, and witness’s expenses £j’J

Mr. W. J. Joyce appeared for plain tiff and Mr. J. W. Haiwaii lor de-