APPEAL COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVII, Issue 11521, 5 November 1900, Page 6

APPEAL COURT.

[BV TELEGRAPH.PRESS ASSOCIATION'.] Wellington, Saturday. The Court, of Appeal sat to-day, and gave judgments in the following cases: — Wellington and Manawatu JJailway Co. v. McLeod: This was an appeal against a verdict for damages sustained by McLeod, an engine-driver. The appeal was dismissed. The Court held that action at common law and under the Employers' Liability Act co-existed, that there was evidence of negligence for the jury, that there was evidence to justify the finding of the jury, and that McLeod had not voluntarily accepted the risk.. Leave was given to appeal to the Privy Council. Donaghy v. Brennan: The Chief Justice delivered the judgment of the Court in this case, which dismissed the appeal, holding that lunacy is no defence in an action for damages for a wrong. McDonald v. McFhrlane: This appeal was also dismissed. Jones v. New Zealand Trust and Loan Company: A case removed to the Appeal Court from Christchurch. Judgment was given for defendant. Commissioner of Taxes v. Bank of New Zealand: This case was removed from the Supreme Court. It referred to native lands in Gisborne district, mortgaged to and managed by the Bank. The Court held that tke Bank was mortgagee in possession within the meaning of the Tax Acts, but that the land was native land within the meaning of the Acts, and that the Bank was therefore liable as occupier, of native land, and was not liable for progressive tax.

Kebbel v. Ollivier: This case was removed from the Supreme Court at Wellington. Judgment was given for plaintiff. Plaintiff sold the defendant some Bank of New Zealand shares after the banking legislation of 1894. The Bank refused to register the transfer, and plaintiff had to pay calls, and sued defendant to indemnify him. The Court held that plaintiff was entitled to be indemnified, and that the Banking Acts did not affect the validity of con" tiacts between vendor and purchaser. Staples v. Corby: The appeal was dismissed. The Court held that the fact that appellants held a covenant to buy beer exclusively from them, did not give them an interest in land sufficient to entitle -them to object to the land being brought under the Land Transfer Act, and their rights were not such as could be brought down and recorded on the title.

Matthew v. Dampney: The Court dismissed this appeal. In the afternoon, three Crown cases, which had been reserved, were heard. Regina v. Bourke: This is a Christchurch case. The question was whether the Crown has, in addition to the peremptory challenges given by the Act of 1898, a preexisting right to direct jurymen to stand aside. Judgment was reserved. Regina v. King: This is a Dunedin case, the question being whether, on an indictment for robbery, a prisoner could be convicted of common assault. Judgment was reserved.

Regina v. Fetzer: A Wanganui case. Prisoner shot a horse which was trespassing, and the question was whether there was any evidence that the Act was committed with colour of right. Judgment was reserved, ■ <