DISPUTE OVER BOTTLES

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22211, 11 September 1935, Page 16

DISPUTE OVER BOTTLES

ACTION AGAINST LICENSEE COMPANY SEEKS INJUNCTION DENIAL OF ALLEGATIONS An application for an injunction to restrain the defendant, a hotel licensee, from using bottles belonging to the Auckland Bottle Company, Limited, for bottling draught beer, a practice it was alleged he was following, was made by the company in the Supremo Court before Mr. Justice Fair yesterday. The defendant was A. G. Pillinger, of Waihi, for whom Mr. Dyson appeared. The company was represented by Mr. Barrowclough. In the statement of claim the plaintiff company alleged that /on June 14 defendant wrongfully seized and took possession of a number of bottles, the property of plaintiff. Each of the bottles k was marked with plaintiff's trade mark, the letters "A.8.C." within a triangle. Each was also marked: "Ibis bottle is the property of tho Auckland Bottle Company, Limited, Auckland, N.Z." Alternatively, the plaintiff company alleged that defendant took possession of the bottles and converted them to his own use; further, that defendant claimed tho right to use and to continue to use the bottles. Nominal Damages Olalmed The plaintiff company claimed nominal damages of £25, and sought an injunction restraining defendant from continuing to use the bottles. He was asked to surrender the bottles already .in his possession. Mr. Barrowclough explained that the business of tho plaintiff company was to supply bottles on hire to breweries and bottling firms. The bottles eventually reached hotels and the consumer, but once they were emptied, it was contended, the possessor had no further right to them. "The whole ground of our complaint is that defendant is using our bottles for bottling beer from casks in his hotel," said counsel. Defendant was using the company's property without its permission. Evidence was called in support of the allegations. The defence was a denial that the bottles of the company had been used to bottle beer from casks in the hotel. It was stated the bottles had been filled at the brewery with draught beer, labelled there, and delivered to defendant. Judge Grants Adjournment , Defendant, in evidence, said he had been licensee of the Sterling Hotel, Waihi, during the past 12 months. He sold riggers of beer at two prices, Is and Is 4d. Ordinary bottles he refilled himself and sold at the former price. Riggers bottled .at the brewery in A.B.C. bottles sold at Is 4d. On pay days at the mine he would run short of the ordinary riggers. To meet the requirements of his customers he would take the label off the brewery-bottled rigger and substitute a plain top. The beer would not be removed. He would sell the bottle at Is. Witness denied that lie had refilled the A.B.C. bottles. Mr. Dyson said he had not thought it necessary to call the barman in support of the licensee, but it would appear that the evidence would be required in view of the evidence for the plaintiff company. His Honor said he would grant leave to call the barman from Waihi, and the case was adjourned until this morning.