STATE HOUSES

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXII, Issue 271, 31 October 1932, Page 8

STATE HOUSES

SUPPLY OF WATER WHEN BATES NOT PAID. APPEAL COURT DECISION. Wellington, Oct. 29. Judgment was delivered to-day in the Appeal Court case of the State Advances Superintendent v. the Auckland City Council and the One Tree Hill Borough Council, heard on October 3. An originating summons was issued .by the State Advances Superintendent naming the Mayor, councillors and citizens of the city of Auckland, and the Mayor, councillors and burgesses of the borough of One Tree Hill as defendants, and removed to the Court of Appeal for argument. The summons asked for determination of the following questions:— (1) Whether defendants were entitled to refuse to supply water to properties of which the plaintiff was mortgagee and which he leased, unless the arrears of rates due in respect of the supply of water to the mortgagors of such properties were previously paid. (2) Whether when plaintiff had let a mortgaged property which was already connected with the water supply, but in respect of which there were arrears of water rates, defendants were entitled to disconnect the water supply although plaintiff was willing to pay ordinary water rates. (3) Was plaintiff liable to pay a fair and reasonable charge for the supply of water under the circumstances set out in the statements of facts? The Court answered questions (1) and (2) in the negative, and answered question (3) by saying that a fair and reasonable charge must be paid for the supply of water under circumstances set out in the statement of facts, and that the charge made to other persons is at least a test of what is fair and reasonable. Costs amounting to 30 guineas and disbursements were ordered to be paid by the defendants.. In addition to the above answers, Mr Justice Herdman held that the Crown should also pay the cost of connecting up the houses in question with the water system.