SUPREME COURT.—Sittings in Banco.

New Zealand Herald, Volume IV, Issue 1123, 20 June 1867, Page 6

SUPREME COURT.—Sittings in Banco.

"Wednesday, June 19th. (Before His Ilonor Mr. Justice Moore). EE WILLIAM AVERT, PLASTEBEB. Mr. Wynn presented tho insolvent's petition, and his Honor made tho usual order appointing tho Inspector sequestrator. TOTJ-SO V. O'KEKrFfi. Mr. Hosketli iwoved to make tho deed of submission a rulo of Court. Mr. Wynn nppoared for Mr. O'Kecffe. His Honor granted the rulo as moved. MACIIATIIB V. MACFABtANE. Mr. Gillies, for defendant, moved that Joseph Cochrane, the sequestrator of tlio estate of the petitioner, be required to cause himself to be substituted as plaintiff. Mr. Wynn appeared for plaintiff and consonted to the motion. .Rule granted. DICKSON V WltoON". Mr. Gillies, instructed by Mr. Brookfleld, appeared as counsel for plaintiff, and Mr. Whitaker for defendant. This was a special ease, and tho question for the Court to deoide was, whether tho description of tho attesting witness to the bill of sale, as stated in the affidavit, was sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the bills of sale designated by tho Act of 1856. The affidavit stated that G. L. Gunn, tho attesting witness, resided at Auckland, in the colony of New Zealand, and was a bricklayer. Mr. Gillies contended that the description was not sufficient, and relied upon " Re R. P. Harris, 35 L.T., 487—Irish Reports," and "Nathan v. Naylor, 2 W & W, 264." Mr. Wliitafcer contra referred to "Cotton v. Sawyer, 10, M & W, 328," and " Hatton v. English, 26, LJQB, 161." His Honor, in giving judgment, stated thai the intention of the Act wbb, that such information should be given as would enable anyone readily to trace the attesting witness. In the present case, the description was, in his opinion, much, too vague, and did not give the necessary information. Upon the authority of the cases cited by Mr. Gillies, the question stated for the opinion of the Court must be answered in the negative.