MILK PRODUCERS

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVII, Issue 10846, 11 March 1921, Page 5

MILK PRODUCERS

SHAREHOLDERS’ LIABILITY. INTERESTING CASE AT OTAKI. A case of unusual interest to dairy farmers was heard before Mr F. K. Hunt, S.M., at Otaki on Wednesday, when the Te Haro Co-operative Dairy Company, Ltd., proceeded against Clarence Sawyer, of Te Horo, farmer, and Ernest Alfred. Pullman, also a farmer of Te Horo, in claims for £lO and £l2 respectively. Plaintiff said that the defendants during the period from November 27th. 1920, to January, 1921, were sharehokL ers in the plaintiff company, and also “milk producers” within the meaning assigned to those wards by article “2” of the articles of the association of the plaintiff company. Plaintiff maintained that the defendants made default for a period from November 27 th to January 14th, under article “6” of tho articles of the association of the plaintiff company, in supplying to tho plaintiff company at its factory at Te Horo the milk produced by them within a radius of five miles of the factory. It was stated that the. plaintiff' company was receiving milk during the whole of the time m which the default was made, and that during Ups default period the defendants produced milk from 10 to 12 cows respectively. Further, in pursuance of a resolution of the directors of the plaintiff company passed on January 14th, 1921, with powers conferred upon them by paragraph “g,” article “7,” the .defendants were called upon to. pay within fourteen days of the passing of the resolution the sum of £lO ana £l2 as and for liquidated damages iu respect of such default, being at the rate of £1 for each cow from which the defendant produced milk during the period in which default was made. It was stated that the defendants were duly advised of the contents of the resolution by letter dated January 7th, 1921. . , . . For the plaintiff, a previous decision of Mr Justice Cooper was quoted (Gore v. Newbury), where, under similar conditions, it was held that the claim was perfectly valid, and the amount recoverable. For the defendant, however, it was contended that subsequent to the previoua decision the House of Lords had considered a similar case on appeal and found that the penalty was not recoverable. At the conclusion of the evidence both parties intimated to His Worship that in the event of the decision going against them an appeal would be lodged. Decision was, reserved.

Tho Acclimatisation Society has notified the Internal Affairs Department that the society is desirous of having an open season during June for the taking and killing of opossums.