MILK SHAKES

Hokitika Guardian, 8 July 1937, Page 6

MILK SHAKES

QUESTION .OF' SALES. , (Per Press Association-—Copyright) tf 'll •», ■ WELLINGTON, July 7. The Chief Justice, after hearing argument on whether the selling of milk shakes came under the sale of milk •<ls defined in the Wellington City Milk Supply Act, 1919,' said lie had no 'doubt about his. .decision, but would commit it to writing. The case was an appeal by Tiffins, Limited, against the Magistrate’s decision in favour of the Wellington City Corporation that milk shakes substantially of I'hiiUc, and that the sale came under the definition of the, Act. | Counsel lor . appellant cited the cocoa, coffee, ice cream, butter and; other commodities bearing , a close re-j tatioiiship to milk. Ho contended thej. drink that- appellant sold was not milk} within the meaning of the Act, but a| confection or a composition in which: the process was involved. He cited) a case in which it had been held that the sale of raw meat with stuffing was not a sale of meat. I Chief Justice Myers asked counsel for tire Corporation whether he won Idstill say a milk shake, was milk if it were called by a name not including the word milk. He added: “From his judgment, I think the Magistrate has been misled by the fact that the word forms part of the name of the. article.” ■ i