MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LII, Issue 16097, 10 December 1915, Page 5

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES. RESPONSIBILITY IN REPAIRS. As action in which W. H. Murray and Company, boot manufacturers, of Auckland, claimed a sum of £28 damages from Hay dock and Spragg, engineers, was heard yesterday at the Magistrate's Court by Mr. E. C. Cutten, S.M. Mr. H. J. Durham appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. S. W. Grace for the defendants. In August last the defendants undertook the repair of a boot press at the ptaintiffe* factory, and it was alleged that the defendants' employees, through negligence, damaged the machine to such an extent that it would lose half its efficiency. The cost of effecting the necessary repairs was set down at £28, and that amount was accordingly claimed. A counter-claim was lodged by the defendants for a sum of £2 9a, for payment for work done for the plaintiffs. For the defence, it was urged that once the defendants had received the machine for repair and had started to dissemble it, they had assumed entire control over the machine. The plaintiffs' employee, or operator, had been told not to work the machine, yet he had exceeded these instructions, and the accident had occurred. Therefore, it was contended, the defendant could not be held responsible for the damage caused. Several witnesses for both parties gave evidence. The magistrate said that he was not satisfied that there had been any negligence on the part of either the plaintiffs or the defendants' workmen, but there was evidence that there had been carelessness on the part of the latter. Judgment was civen for the plaintiffs for the amount claimed, and for the defendant on the counter-claim for the full amount. Costs were allowed the plaintiffs. JUDGMENT SUMMONS OASES. Orders for payment forthwith, in default varying terms of imprisonment, were made in the following judgment summons cases—L. Stonham v. L. Scott, Auckland. £1 17s 6d : Israel Gilhor v. Frank Toms, Newton, £2 15s-. '