CALLIOPE DOCK ACCIDENT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 13498, 27 May 1907, Page 6

CALLIOPE DOCK ACCIDENT.

W-SAVILL ; COMPANY V.

HARBOUR BOARD.

PLAINTIFFS ORDERED TO FURNISH

! ; PARTICULARS. The action pending between the Shaw, Savill and Albion Company (plaintiffs) and the Auckland Harbour Board (defendants), claim for damages arising out of the Calliope Dock disaster, which occurred; last November, was the subject of argument before Mr. Justice Denniston at the Supreme Court, in Chambers, on. Saturday. Application was made by defendants for permission to administer interrogatories to plaintiff.v.. with a view to eliciting proof of a special contract entered into for the docking of the Mamari. and that the steamer's detention was not in consequence of any act of defendant's, but because the Customs refused a clearance: and further requiring plaintiffs to specify, with particularity, the items of the damages claimed. Messrs. T. Cotter-and McVeagh appeared in" support of the application, and Mr. F. E;; Baume (instructed by Mr. F. Earl) to oppose it. In regard to the first-mentioned point, His Honor said he saw no reason why the plaintiffs should object to admit the; existence of a special contract. Respecting the interrogatory asking .'■ for. details oi: the claim, Air. Baume addressed His Honor at length,. and quoted a number of authorities in support of his contention that it was not the right procedure to adopt. He contended interrogatories were to be confined solely to matters at isssue, and not to points of evidence. Mr. Cotter, in reply, pointed out that the ■ claim was lumped in one sum, and it •was merely desired to have the items particularised. . In a grocery bill, for instance, details of the account were supplied, and the same should be done with the claim for damages. ' , His Honor said he thought the application was a proper one to make, and that particulars of the claim should be furnished. He accordingly granted the application, the interrogatories to be answered within 10 days, and the costs of the application (£6 6s) to be the costs of the case. - • '■

' His Honor was asked if he would . hear the action for damages, and agreed to do so, fixing the hearing for June 17, at ten a.m. ■ " ■ ' ';'

The smaller claims for compensation, arising out of the same accident, were mentioned, and His Honor intimated that he would not hear any of the cases if they involved a re-trial of the questions of fact, but that he might take issues as to damages. "