THE HARNET CASE.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVI, 28 April 1926, Page 11

THE HARNET CASE.

EXTRA EDITION.

JUDGE’S DECISION. mUTNISEL’S PEE A UPHELD. BY CABLE-PRESS ASSOCIATION—'COPYRIGHT. Received 11.5 a.m. to-day. LO'KOOiN, April 27. Air. Justice Horridge, in tide ca.se of of W. S. Harnett, after hearing legal argument, entered judgment with costs in favour of the defendant, whose counsel pleaded the Statute of limitations Air. Justice Horridge said that the defendant was liable for the consequences of bis .negligence, even though the actual order for detention had been made by justices. His Lordship disagreed with the contention that,' though the jury considered Harnett to be .sane, lie should be viewed as a lunatic for the purposes of construing the Statute of Limitations. His Lordship's duty was (to construe the statute, however regrettable the result. — Reuter. ' [A cable message published a few days ago .stated that Harnett was awarded damages against Dr. Henry Fisher of Sittingboume, for negligent ly declaring him to be insane in 1912. The jury found that Harnett was not insane, also that Dir. Fisher did not aht with reasonable care in declaring him insane. The Judge, in summing up, declared the case .to he of con.sidearlble importance. It was important 1/ and unfortunate to Harnett, also to doctors land the general public. The ' Judge intimated that be would hear legal arguments on the jury’s findings to-morrow. Harnett in 1924 was /awarded £25,000 damages against Dr. G. H. Bond, lunacy commissioner, and Dr. G. H. Adam, of West Alai in g, for wrongful detention in an asylum, but the House of Lords squashed the High Court judgment in March, 1925.]