COURT OF APPEAL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXXIII, Issue 15924, 9 May 1912, Page 3

COURT OF APPEAL.

[Per Press Association*.] WELLINGTON. May 8

lii Dalgety and Co., Limited, v. the Solicitor-General, the Court unanimously held that the effect of the open fiolicy taken out by Dalgety arid Go., limited, with certain of Lloyd’s underwriters in London, under which Dalgety and Co., Limited, insure the motor-cars of third parties in New Zealand, was to make Dalgety and Co., Limited, agents for the underwriters in New Zealand in respect of such insurance. and the underwriters were therefore carrying on the business of insurance in New Zealand, and liable to make the deposit required by Part 111. of the Foreign Insurance Companies’ Deposits Act, 1908. Costs were allowed to the Solicitor-General on the middle scale. ' • The following reserved judgments were delivered by the Appeal Court today. In International Investment Company versus Andrews, the premium bond case, Mr Justice Williams, delivering the Court’s judgment, held that a scheme for raising money by premium bonds was a lottery and said, in conclusion, “The substantial object of the scheme is the contribution of money for the purpose of dividing it by lot in prizes. We say the substantial object because if that inducement wore absent .it is hopeless to suggest that money could 'be raised for these bonds at a lower rate of interest than could be obtained for securities equally good in every respect. Wo think, therefore, that the determination of the Magistrate was correct in point of law and that the appeal should be dismissed.” , Respondent was allowed £lO costs. ' " ■ \ liv the case Public Trustee, versus Pilkingtonj which turned upon the construction of a residuary bequest in. the will of Anders Anderson, deceased, the question being asked whether aai adopted daughter, Mrs Pilkington, was entitled to tho residuary estate under the following words, “Upon trust for all my children or any child who being a son or sons shall attain the ago of 21 years, or being a daughter or daughters shall attain that age or marry under that age,” etc. The majority of tho Court, Justices Stout. Williams, Edwards and Chapman, Air Justice Dennisfcon dissenting decided that Mrs Pilkington was included and took the residuary estate. Costs to all parties to bo taxed as between solicitor and client and paid out of the estate. In the appeal Angelini versus Antico, A local case, the Appeal Court affirmed the judgment given by Sir Robert Stout iu the Supreme Court, holding that dictating a letter containing libel to a clerk arid the writing of such letter by such clerk is not a publication of libel to such clerk by the person dictating. The appeal was dismissed and costs in the middle scale were allowed respondent.