HEATING APPLIANCES.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 17 October 1924, Page 4

HEATING APPLIANCES.

AN INADEQUATE REQUISITION. ' ' * ' Upholding the objection that the requisition of the Inspector of Factories was too vague and indefinite to enable defendants to act upon it, Mr E. Page, S.M., at Wellington on Wednesday, dismissed an information which alleged that the Scoullar Company, Ltd., had failed to provide such heating appliances in their factory as the inspector deemed necessary. In the course of his reserved judgment the -Magistrate remarked that the requisition served by the inspector did not indicate what heating appliances were deemed necessary or what standard of temperature in the workrooms would be satisfactory. Defendants had ho means, of knowing whether they should appeal against it, but they made some effort at. compliance by installing kerosene heaters. Although the inspector was not satisfied with these, there had been no statement as to the class of appliance that would be approved, or the temperature that must be maintained. Defendants might install an expensive steam, water, electric, or gas heating plant, and find that it did not satisfy the inspector. “1 think that a requisition under Section 44 of the Factories Act. to be valid,” concluded his Worship, “must specify the heating appliance that the inspector thinks necessary, or give some standard which will enable the recipient safely to comply with it. It must be understood bv defendants,' however, that this decision deals solely with the adequacy of the requisition. They are bound by law to provide adequate heating appliances, and unless they make- satisfactory arrangements to. do this they may be again proceeded against on another.requisition.”