COMPENSATION COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 15169, 7 December 1912, Page 5

COMPENSATION COURT.

HOBSON BAY DRAINAGE.

CLAIM AGAINST BOARD.

The hearing of the claim for £1290, brought against the Auckland and Suburban Drainage Board by David Kenealy, of Remuera, as compensation for alleged loss sustained by claimant arising out of the construction of the Hobson Bay main. sewer, was continued before the Compensation Court ait Supreme Court Buildings yesterday. Mr. Justice Cooper presided, and the assessors wore Messrs. G. Elliot and John Dawson. .Mr. E. W. Burton appeared for the claimant, Mr. T. Cotter, K.C., and with hvm Mr. Bagnall, for tie Drainage Board, and Mr. R. McVeagh for the Auckland Harbour Board. At the beginning of yesterday's hearing the president staled that the ■ Court' would not make an award in respect of the two sections whichs had no water frontage. The case wovld, however, ha stated for the Supremo Court to enable the parties to appeal if they should think fit. >...-;

Mr. Burton led further evidence to show that the sewerage work had lowered

the value of claimant's property. For the defence, Mr. Cotter called H. E. Vaile, land valuer, who estimated the

total depreciation "to claimant's property by the construction of the sower, at £175., Other estimates of the depreciation caused

were given as follows —F. G. Ewlngton, £195; J. Bollard, M.P., £225; Newcomb, £203; W. Duncan, £150; J. Thomas, £170 G. B. Osmond, £180; and T. :. B,

Clay, £120.

T. E. McKenzie, Government valuer, estimated the present value of claimant's property at £150 an acre. Ho said that when it was valued by the Government' officials some years ago;, claimant had objected to the valuation,'which had been reduced to £85 an acre. Ho also said at» . that time that he attached no value to thai water-frontage. : The witnesses for the defence were unanimous in declaring that the sewerage works had added materially to the value of the property, each affirming that any depreciation due to the presence of the manhole on claimant's . property was more than compensated for by the advantages to be gained by the property being connected with the sower. ~ H •":>,.:; \ ; " : ■/;. W. E. Bush, engineer to the Drainage Board, stated in evidence that the sewers age works had not-depreciated the value of claimant's property,. The ; Drainage Board had in all 76 manholes on private property in Auckland, and there bid been only' eight claims against the Board.■■ This concluded the evidence, and the hearing was adjourned until next Wednesday morning, when -legal' afgament'will .be heard. ■''':'/'''''■'.;; : ..:/'':' ''/