MAGISTERIAL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCVII, Issue 11188, 9 February 1897, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHRISTCHURCH. Monday, Feb. 8, (Before Mr 11. Bcefcham, S.M.) Civil Cases.— Judgment for plaintiffs, by default, was given in the following cases: Tv”alter, Myhre and Co. v. J. Coombcs, claim £l3; I. Allen v. H. Davis, £1 4s ; Booth, Macdonald and Co. v. J. S. Freeman, =27 13s 3d; 'Wilding and Lewis v. A. Clark, =33 10s Cd ; J. Molloy v. 11. M’llroy, £5 11s 9d; Hobbs and Goodwin v. C, "Woods, .28. The following adjournments were made: —Chrystall and Co. v, Lindeman, P. H. Bruges v; A. Duncan, and Walter A. Wood Company v. R. N. Bayer until Fob. 2:1; Slade v. Mills until March 8— Wliitcombo and Tombs v. G-. Beaumont. Mr Stringer for plaintiffs, Mr Wilding for defendant. This was an action to recover £Bl for damages caused to plaintiffs’ stock by the negligent repair of defendant’s guttering. Mr Stringer, in opening the case, said that defendant had removed fjomo old load guttering, which had answered its purpose for twelve years, j This guttering was provided with drips 10ft I apart, to check the fall. The Hew galvanised steel guttering by which the old gutter was replaced had only one drip in 70ft. The receiving box and down pipes were also too small. The amount of actual damage sustained by the plaintiff was admitted. G. 11. Wliitcombo, managing; director of Wliitcombo and Tombs, said that his firm had rented the present building used by the Company for fifteen or sixteen years. Had called the attention of defendant's agent to the state of tho roof, and requested him to put things straight. Tho old lead guttering was taken up and replaced by steel. For fourteen years had no trouble with the old gutters. Was absent from town when the heavy shower of Nov. 15, which caused the damage, occurred, but had noted its effects. J. C. Maddison, architect, generally corroborated Mr Stringer’s opening remarks. He characterised the new repairs generally as showing bad workmanship. It. W. England, architect, corroborated the evidence of tho former witness. C. Williams, builder, gave similar evidence. To Mr Wilding 1 ; Steel guttering had now practically superseded that made of lead. Mr Wilding contended that no evidencehad been led to show that a breach of the covenant for quiet enjoyment had been committed. With regard to the covenant for repair, no liability attached to the landlord until he had received notice of i want of repair which caused the alleged mischief. Tho damages claimed were too remote to tho covenant for repair. While the expert witnesses on the other side had condemned tho plumbers’ work, no damage had been traced to deficiencies in that work. He called W. B. Scott, builder, who erected tbe house in 1881, and considered the lead guttering sufficient to carry the rain off the roof. The drips were put in the old guttering to allow for the contraction and expansion of tho lead. Had used steel guttering extensively. Considered that a down pipe which had carried the water for sixteen years would continue to carry it. Any failure to do so could only be caused by obstructions, and such gutters should be looked to every month or six weeks. To Mr Stringer: As a practical builder would not have interfered with the old lead gutter, so long as it did its work. Case adjourned until 2 p.m. to-morrow.

KAIAPOL Monday, Ff.b. 8. (Before Mr 11. W. Bishop, S.M.) Civil Cases. —Ruihi Uru v. Henry Urn, claim £45. Judgment for amount, and costs £4 3s. Mr joynt for plaintiff. Licensing. —A temporary transfer of the license of tho Koyal Hotel, Woodend, was granted from James Stevenson to John Adam Hansmann.