BRANDS OF SALT.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIV, Issue 307, 24 November 1934, Page 3

BRANDS OF SALT.

RECENT COMPANY ACTION, SUPREME COURT ARGUMENT. Argument arising out of the recent action brought by the proprietors of Kruschcn Salts, E. Griffiths Hughes, Limited, of Manchester, against' the proprietors of Rhusal Salts, the Allen Saline Company (N.Z.), Limited, of Newmarket, was submitted to Mr Jus-tice-Herdman in the Auckland Supreme Court last week. Mr Richmond appeared for the' plaintiff company and Mr Barrowclougli represented the defendant company. The plaintiff company had sought an injunction and claimed £SOO damages against the defendant company for alleged infringement of rights. His Honour had granted the plaintiffs nominal damages, to be assessed, in respect of one particular carton formerly used by defendants, but had decided that the plaintiffs were not entitled to succeed in their application for an injunction restraining the use of the name “Rhusal” and the defendants' red band carton, which was in use when the writ was issued. The assessing of damages and the matter of costs were the subject of the argument last week.

Mr Richmond said, on the question of nominal damages as affecting costs, that there was a substantial right infringed. His Honour had held that it was wilfully and fraudulently infringed, and it appeared to him that His Honour would not give contemptuous damages. Plaintiffs had suffered a grievous wrong, and the least damages that could properly be given were damages that would carry the costs of action. Mr Barrowclougli said there was no evidence that plaintiffs suffered any damage. He admitted they were entitled°to what damages they could have proved because of the use of the P 3 carton. His Honour said he would award £5 as damages on that particular issue. Argument then proceeded as to costs: Mr Richmond submitting that plaintiffs were entitled to costs on the lower scale for the trial and all interlocutory matters, because all those matters were necessary to enable them to get the judgment they had got. Mr Barrowclougli asked His Honour that he allow defendants costs on the scale of £2OOO, as the rights they had to defend, and did successfully defend, were worth that amount at least. Decision on the question of costs was reserved.