LANDING FROM FERRY BOATS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIV, Issue 16600, 25 July 1917, Page 5

LANDING FROM FERRY BOATS.

SUPREME COURT APPEAL CASES.

Two appeals from decisions of magistrates were heard yesterday at the Supremo Court by Mr. Justice Cooper. One appeal was allowed. The appellant, John Hislop (Mr. Scantlebury) had beta convicted, on the information of Cecil Hufcchings (Mr. Campbell), of breaking a Harbour Board by-law by alighting from the ferry-boat Peregrine while it was la motion. In the lower Court there was a certain conflict of evidence as to whether or not the boat was in motion, but the magistrate held that for the purposes of the by-law a steamer was in motion until the gangway had been lowered. Mr. Scantlebury contended that this was an incorrect interpretation of the by-law, and submitted that the question as to whether or not a boat was in motion was pureiv one of fact. His Honour ordered the ca.-a to be remitted back to the magistrate, so that he might determine as to whether the boat was in motion.

In the other case, judgment had been given against the appellants, the Union Steam Ship Company (Mr. Campbell) in a case in which the respondent, William Watson, of Horotiu (Mr. McDiarmid), sued for damages in respect to some billiards table slates which were broken while in transit by one of the company's steamers. The facts were that each case contained a set of five slates. Two elates in one case and one in another had ber-n damaged. In giving judgment, the magistrate allowed respondent the cost of a full set. Mr. Campbell, who contended that the magistrate incorrectly estimated the proper measure of damages, said that to recover the cost of a full set respondeat should have communicated to the company the fact that an injury to one slate would render the full set useless. Decision wad reserved.