A NEW ZEALAND APPEAL CASE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 12834, 6 April 1905, Page 6

A NEW ZEALAND APPEAL CASE.

[FROM OUR OWN CORRESrO"tEXT.] London-, Parch 4. On* Wednesday the Judicial Coimittce of the Privy Council gave judgmefc respecting the claims of natives of Nel Zealand against the Assets Company. the question was whether the Supreme L'ourt of Appeal rightly ordered the cancelation of a certificate of title to certain laiis which had been issued by the Assets 4>mp;iny. The parties to the actions, which Are consolidated, were;— The Assets (pmpaiiy v. Mere Roihi and others; thl Assets Company v. Wiremu Pere and another (consolidated appeal.-), the Asset! Company v. Panapa Waibopi and otitis, the Assets Company v. Wi Pero and others (consolidated appeal.-;); the Assets Company v. Teira. Ganginui and others, lie Assets Company v. Heni Tipiin'si and others (consolidated appeals). In. delivering judgment the Judicial Committee salt the substantial question was whether th& Assets Company had acquired a good tit* as against the plaintiffs (the native Maris) of certain lands of which they had een long out of possession. The Assets Company had been tor many years not on! in possession, but also registered in the Ind registers of the colony as o*vner of -.he lands. The natives brought actions to recover the land which formerly belonged to them. Certain irregularities ivere relied upon, and the Court of Appeal gave judgment for the natives. The .Judicial Coninittee of the Privy Council held that theie might. have been irregularities, 1 not nothinr substantially to affect the title of the As. sets Company to the ownership of the land. Their Lordships could not ielp thinking that the equitable doctrines of constructive fraud had weighed too much vith the Court of Appeal, and had induced! them to impute fraud to the Assets Company, although no dishonesty was established. Their Lordships based their judgment on the conclusiveness of the registered title and in the absence of fraud. Judgment against the natives, with costs, waj pronounced accordingly, the Judicial Conmittee humbly advising His Majesty to allow these appeal's and to reverse the judgments appealed from, with costs, and to enter judgment in each action for the defendants, the Assets Company, with costs, and the costs of each appeal mush be borne bj the respondents thereto. The judgment; was a verv lengthy one, occupying several columns of the Times. j