"A STUPID CASE."

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20628, 29 July 1930, Page 12

"A STUPID CASE."

TIME OF COURT WASTED. PROTEST MADE BY JUDGE. "This is another of thoso absurdly stupid rases which waste tho timo of ail expensive Court and tend to bring the whole system of arbitration into disrepute, ' said Mr. Justice Frazer, president of the Arbitration Court, yesterday when tho Court was called on to decide an appeal acrainst a decision of the Plumbers and Gasfitters' Apprenticeship Committee to refuso to approve a contract of apprenticeship. Tho appellant was J. B. King, who complained that certain information required by the committee had been supplied to the district registrar of apprentices and by him to the committee, and that tho supplying of this information was not a condition of apprenticeship contemplated by section 2 of the Apprentices Act, 1923. "Tho vvholo essence of tho thing is that hero wo have a commiteo on tho ono hand and an employer on tho other standing on their dignity over ;i trivial mutter and then they come along and worry us over it," said His Honor. "Before an employer employs an apprentice ho has to supply certain particulars to tho com mittee. Mr. King, no doubt inadvertently supplied thoso particulars to the district registrar, but when tho committee asked him for them ho replied that ho had already forwarded them to the committee.

"Tho committee, on 'lie other hand, instead of ringing up tho registrar asking for tho information to bo sent along, stood on its dignity and insisted on the form being sent to it, and because t.lio committeo has done that wo have wasted an hour, and goodness knows how many other people have also wasted their time. It is childish to say tho least. So far us tho legal position is concerned, howover, there does not seem to ho any dis puto as to tho facilities that tho employer has for teaching an apprentice or over the number of his journeymen. "Tho Court is faced with the formal defence that the requirements of the Act havo been compiled with. The particulars have been sent forward and it could not bo said that tho appeal was not in order for that reason.

"Wo cannot very well allow tho appeal and we cannot vory well disallow it, how ever. Tho only thing wo can do is to adjourn tho further hearing of tho appeal with the intimation that Mr. King should forward tho particulars which tho com mitteo asks and to hopo that we will hear no more about it. When the coin mitteo has what it requires it will then have to decide the question on tho facts There .seems to havo been somo feeling over an antecedent matter—of tho apprentice being employed for some months before tho application to have him apprenticed was made. Ilowovei, if tho circumstances disclose a breach it is for tho rogistrnr to consider whether he should prosecute tho employer."