IMPORTS IMPOST

Hokitika Guardian, 27 April 1939, Page 6

IMPORTS IMPOST

AOiiON IN SUPREME dCrtlß-I^' AUCICI*AND,ApriI.2Sr.' f . An action ip the Supreme .Court challenging the validity of; the import control regulations,.. iwas'.' coinmenced. beidre Mr Justice; dallan;:Tne plaintiff, F. li. Jackson and 'ixmpmj, .Ltd.,,, of. Auckland, set February last they 1 imported from Sydney i. 4 uozen tin plate kerosene pumps, complied with all Abe .provisions <_of ■ the - Customs Act, paid,, the duty, andkder maudecf delivery of the package, which delivery was 'refused on the ground that ■ the importation of the said tihwas was prohibited, unless covered by a; license from, the Minister, for Customs, ,',.>.3 tv

Plaintiff claimed that-the regulation of prohibition, invalid,' and that the Collector of Customs had wrongfully detained tlie package. They claimed delivery or the cost of the goods, plus £IOO damages for detention. ' - i, Mr A. H. Johnstone, K.C.,Vwith Mr Munro, argued the case for the plaintiff, and the Solicitor-General, Mr Hi H. Cornish, K.C.; with Mr V. ; -R. Meredith, appeared ipr the defendant, . the Collector of Customs, Auckland.. C, ,

Mr Johnstone said the facts were simple. The plaintiff Company imported the goods stated from Sydiiey,, and. requested delivery of, them,.,.but was,' tqid .that the goods wopld not;be delivered unless the phiintiff produced a licence under the import control regulations, 1933,. authorising him to do so. Those regulations were made, on December 5, 1933, and panVe jnto force two days later.. Plain tiff.replied that these regulations were without validity in law, wereultra vires and void, and persisted in the demand for delivery, of. the goods.. The. question for. determination appeared to he whether the import control regulations, .1938, were valid regulaions or ( not. „ Legal argument; occupied the whole dayjt > ’ i , The hearing is unfinished.