COALMINING AGREEMENT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19809, 2 December 1927, Page 14

COALMINING AGREEMENT.

JUDGMENT FOR £1750. A STAY OF EXECUTION. Judgment for plaintiff, Adit, Limited, for the full amount claimed from Renown Collieries. Limited, £1750, was given by Mr. Justice Reed in the Supreme Court yesterday. Mr. Meredith and Mr. Gould appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Johnston for the defendant. His Honor, in his judgment, said the defendant company was the. owner of certain options to take coalmining leases of coal and fireclay. It held these options (one of which had been converted into a lease) under agreement with the plaintiff upon certain terms and conditions. The second year of the term of the lease had expired and no coal had been won by the defendant. The plaintiff claimed £1750, being at the rate of Is a ton on a computed basis of 35,000 tons. The defendant did not dispute its liability to pay the plaintiff upon this basis but claimed the right to deduct a proportion of the amount as corning within the proviso, authorising the deduction of "all royalties payable under the Options.'' It wars clear that no royalty was payable in respect of either of the two options except upon coal or fireclay actually mined and sold and as none bad been either mined or sold neither Tapp nor Brougljton (the option-holders) had any financial interest in the £1750. It appeared to His Honor that the agreement was free from ambiguity and the intention of the parties was clear. When coal or fireclay was being won the plaintiff agreed to the deduction of the -royalty payable to the person upon whose land it was being worked. Until it was so worked a definite amount was payable, much in the nature of a dead rent. This was the plain and literal meaning of the agreement. Plaintiff was entitled to recover the full amount claimed. Mr. Johnston said the matter was one of considerable "importance to the defendant company and he understood the company proposed to carry the matter further. He asked for a stay of execu r tiot), and this was granted until after the next r.ittings of the Court of Appeal.