DISMISSAL NOT VALID

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22240, 15 October 1935, Page 13

DISMISSAL NOT VALID

POSITION OF SECRETARIES 'IRRELIGIOUS BODY'S ACTION COURT ALLOWS APPEAL The affairs of the New Zealand Christian Endeavour Union, which were recently the subject of an action in the Magistrate's Court, wero brought before Mr. Justice Callan in the Supreme Court yesterday in the form of an appeal against the magistrate's decision.

The action was brought in the first instance by Kenneth H. Molvin (Mr. Goldstine) on behalf of members of the New Zealand Christian Endeavour Union against Noel-Carless and Ethol Carless (Mr. R. McVeagh and Mr. McArthur) for the recovery of goods alleged to have been unlawfully retained. 'Mr. and Mrs. Carless had been joint secretaries of the union, and the goods of which possession was sought from them included a typewriter, literature, bank books, records, a duplicator and a table, of a total value of £IOO. It was stated that Mr. and Mrs. Carless had been appointed secretaries in February of last year for two years, and had been dismissed from office by the executive committee.

* Mr. W. R. McKean, S.M., in a reserved decision, ordered the property to be handed over to Mr. Melvin and awarded £2 damages. It was against this decision that Mr. and Mrs. Carless appealed. Counsel's Contentions Mr. McVeagh said that neither the central organisation of the Christian Endeavour Union nor the branch unions were corporate bodies, but wore in law aggregations of individuals, of whom the appellants were two. If the individual members were co-owners of the property then it followed as a matter of law that any of the co-owners were entitled to possession. His Honor said the argument seemed to involve far reaching consequences. If 'a meeting of the Christian Endeavour Union wero in progress, with typewriters, books, papers, pencils and other possessions lying about, if each member present reached out his hand and took everything within his reach, then nobody had any redress against anybody else. Mr. McVeagh said the difficulty could be got over by incorporating. Mis Honor: It is very terrifying, if true. It would show how impossible it is to attempt to carry on any activity without incorporating. Counsel said the. executive committee had no power given them by the constitution to dismiss officers. Comment by Judge Mr. Goldstine contended that an action bv a joint owner against coowners did lie. Without possession of the materials that were in dispute, it was almost impossible for the union to carry on. The funds of the union were locked up, and the appellants refused to hand over the fixed deposit slips. The executive had power to dismiss a secretary during his office if they considered that in the interests of the union.

His Honor: Quite frankly it startles me if persons can be elected to office for a term of two years, and then pushed out merely on a declaration that it is in the interests of the society to do so. His Honor asked if the Carlesses had done something wrong. Mr. Goldstine said that had been suggested. " Then surely on elementary principles of justice the executive had no right to deal with them without hearing them in their own defence," said His Honor. " I admit," said His Honor, " that the magistrate's decision is the one that will probably bring peace quicker. Principles of Justice

" You have not even put these people on trial for the offence of being suspected." His Honor commented as Mr. Goldstine continued his argument. "No one has wished to be unfair, but I think the principles of natural justice have been infringed." His Honor said he regretted he could not take the same view of this matter as was taken by the magistrate. The real controversy came to be whether or not Mr. and Mrs. Carless were still entitled to be considered joint secretaries and treasurers of the union. He thought they were. If the executive was not influenced by charges pointed at, the proper courso would have been to tell the Auckland union to ooserve the constitution and wait until the Carlesses' term of office expired. If the executive had been influenced by these charges without giving the Carlesses an opportunity to defend themselves, then thero had been a clear breach of the rules of natural justice. The judgment of the magistrate was reversed and the appeal allowed with £7 7s costs.