CREDITORS AND DEBTORS.

Marlborough Express, Volume XXXVI, Issue 228, 30 September 1902, Page 1

CREDITORS AND DEBTORS.

AN IMPORTANT JUDGMENT.

Press Association. Electric Telegraph*

Copyright. Wellington, September 29.' A judgment given to-day by the Chief Justice seems calculated to limit the power to punish judgment debtors who make default.

The case was one in which, on the Bth of May, Charlotte Burgess obtained judgment for £10 4s sd, wages due against Daniel Coronno. Next day he obtained a loan bynnortgagiDg his plant. On the 23rd of May, Charlotte Burgess issued a judgment summons against Coronno for the amount of the previous judgment. The hearing took place on the 24th of June, the Magistrate making an order against the debtor for committal to prison in default of payment. Counsel for defendant debtor now moved in the Supreme Court for a prohibition in respect of the execution of the judgment order, on the ground that the absence of proof that the debtor had means at the time of the hearing of the summons deprived the Magistrate of jurisdiction to make a committal order. His Honor said that in making the order the Magistrate held that it had been proved that " the defendant- had money of his own which he had refused to pay to the judgment creditor," but the latter provisions of subsection 5 of section 8 of the Act of 1874 had been repealed by the 1900 Act, consequently " There is only left the case where the debtor has not had money of his own which he has refused to pay. In i;his case the only evidence is that on the 9th of May tie had money and did not then pay. Such proof does not authorise the committal of a debtor to prison. It would no doubt have anthorised the committal under the 1874 Act. The Magistrate has apparently read 'has' as applicable to the period subsequent to the judgment, but prior to the issue or the hearing of the judgment summons. In my opinion it cannot be so read. There is, therefore, no evidence that at the time of the hearing of the judgment the debtor had then any money in his possession; hence, no authority to issue an order of imprisonment. This construction will no doubt much limit the power to punish for not paying debts due, but that seems to Jmye been the intention of the Legislature." Prohibition was therefore granted with £5 5s costs and disbursements.