A NEW ZEALAND CASE.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 10893, 19 April 1898, Page 2

A NEW ZEALAND CASE.

HQUXHLANJJ FBOZEN MEAT COM- . PANY V. NELSON BROS. [Otago Daily Times Correspondent). London. Marob 12. Before tbe Jndioiai Committee of tba Pi Ivy Connoll on Tneadsy laat the South* . land Frozen Meat and Produot Export Company v. Nelson Bros, woi heard. It waa. an appeal from the deolelonof tha New Zealand Conrt of Appeal, dated October 12, 1806, wbloh directed judgment to be entered for the respondents In an aotlon brought In the Supreme Conrt by the appellants against them for alleged branches of agreement. Sir Robert Reld, QO, Mr Mat Union, Q.C.. and Mr Keejnald Aoland appeaiea for the appellants ; and Mr Arthur Cohen, Q C, and Mr Wood Hill for the respondents. It sppe-red that in Jnne, 1891, It was agreed that tbe Southland Frozen Meat Company should snpply to Meaßis Nelson Bros, the whole of the former company's ontpnt nf frozen mast tor three years— 1891, 1892, and 1893. It was blbo agreed that Nelson Bioi. should not, duilag those three years,' erect any frerzlog woiks on lsnd or water at theßlnff, or within tbe limits of the Southland and Wallace cointiei, or be in any way concerned or interested in snoh a matter without speolal arrangement with tha Southland Frczm Meat Company, or do . anything of a Ilka natnre whioh might ln any way Interfere with tbe output batioets or piofita of that oompany, or restrict them, It was alleged by the Southland Company that Nelson Bros, nevertheless erected, or were concerned in ereoiing, freezing woika at Blnif Harbor during the prohibited years, and oontraoted with tbe Hod. J. 6. Ward for the purchase of all the tbe*p fr< zan at those works, wbloh : were known as the Ocean Baaoh freezing works. For this alleged breach of agreement tbe South Company olaimed £30.000 damages, In defence, Menu Ne'son averred that they bad no oonosm or Interest whatever, dlreotly or indlreotly, in the conitrnotlon of the Ocean Bsaoh frerzlog works, or. were In tbelr nse of bntlneaa dnilog the three years oovered by their agreement with the appellants. Farther, tbey allege that the Hon.' J, G. Waid had been a director ot the Southland Frrz-n Meat Company, bnt had resigned In Jnne, 1891, and had established frer zing works on hia own ecoonnt at Bluff Harbor, . NeUon Bros, declared that all they did waa to give Mm aa-lttsnca or advloe In varlona ways and to agree to pnrohaaa from him all the sheep frozen at his establishment. In February, 1893, they arranged to bay hia bnslness, bnt not to take it over until Jannary Ist, 1894, when thf-lr agreement with the appellants wonld terminate. Snoh waa the issue between ibe iitigai* Icf» partieß. The case was tried before Mr Justice Williams, who held that the contract-, first to take the ontpnt of Mr Ward's worki and afterward to pnrohase hia bntlneis, were breaches of agreement, with the appßllanti, and the jury assessed the damages at £7000 Nelson Bros, appealed to the New Zjaland Conrt ol Appeal, who reversed tbe decision of Mr . Jnstioe Williams and dlreoted judgment to be entered for Nelson Bros. The one was expected to last a eon* elderable time, bnt unexpectedly came to a very sndden oonolnslon. After tha eminent oonnsel engaged on behalf of tha S 'nthland Meat Company had argued tha oaie m their side, the pieiieiag Judges consulted briefly together, and then Lord Hersohell Intimated that it was not con« sldered necessary to oall npon tbe counsel for the other side, as their Lordships were quite satliGed that tbe oonilri taken by Messrs Nelson Bros, did not amount to a breaoh of their agreement with the Southland Company. Tbey should, therefore, bnmbly advlae Her Mejoaty that the judgment of the New Z -aland Conrt of Appeal be sffl-med. The appeal waa therefore dl> nil-Bed with ooßts,