BIG VALUES INVOLVED

New Zealand Times, Volume L, Issue 11497, 18 April 1923, Page 3

BIG VALUES INVOLVED

LAND ON LAKE SHORES WHICH TRIBUNAL TO DECIDE COMPENSATION? DECISION MAY GOVERN OTHERS. / Land interests of considerable value are involved in a case which came before the Supreme Court in Wellington yesterday, and the decision which the court has been called on to give may govern a large number of cases. THE POINT AT ISSUE. Some time ago the Crown, by pro clamation, took certain lands on the shores of Lakes Rotorua and Rotoiti. These lands were leased to Europeans, and the question before the court yesterday was whether the Native Land Court has jurisdiction to assess the compensation whenever land which is taken belongs to natives or whether it has jurisdiction only when a claim for compensation is made .by natives. There was a full bench, the judges •present being the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout), Mr Justice floskipg, Mr Justice Herdman, Mr Justice Salmond and Mr Justice Reed. Mr E. J. Prendeville represented the Crown ,Law Office, and Mr R. Hampton, of Rotorua, appeared on the other side. THE COMPENSATION QUESTION. Mr Hampton described the : matter before the court as an application fob the interpretation of section- 33 of the Native Lands Amendment Act, 1919. Section 33, he said, incorporated an arrangement with the natives whereby they ceded portion of Lakes Rotorua and Rotoiti. The Chief Justice: The whole point is whether this should! be under the Public Works Act or under the Compensation A °t. What do you suggest? . Mr Hampton: That it should go to the ordinary Compensation Court. The Chief Justice: What do you say, Mr Prendeville? Mr Prendeville: That it should go to the Native Land Court. The Chief Justice: Do you know of any case where land which ceases to be native land goes to the Native Land Court?, Mr j ustice Salmond: Before the case proceeds, why is this taken against the Solicitor-General and not against the Attorney-General ? T Mr Hampton said this had been done by arrangement with the Solicitor-Gen-eral. decided to substitute the name .of tile Attorney-General for the SolicitorGeneral. * European t.fksttrs Mr Hampton submitted that clause 5 of section 33 of the Native Land Act, 1919, was clear, and said that if land was vested in anyone other than native owners, the case must be taken under the Public Works Act. Mr Justice Reed: You say the whole querilon is between these people (European lessees) and: the Crown. Mr Hampton: Yes. Mr Justice Rieed: The Natives have no inteerst’ at all? Mr Hampton: No. Mr JusticA Salmond: Have the natives no claim to compensation at all? Mr Hampton: None at all. Mr Justice Salmond: Tbe Europeans have a claim which you say goes to the Compensation Court. Mr Hampton: That is my contention, Your Honour, Mr Prendeville contended that an amendment of the Public Works 'Act made section 91 apply 'to the native owners. The Chief Justice: But these are not native owners. Mr Justice Herdman: Are the native owners affected ? Mr Prendeville: They may be. Mr Justice Reed: How can the natives be affected. Mr Prendeville: Some; of the leases are on a native basis, and I submit the Native Land Court will have to adjust the rents as between the natives. There may be native lessees. 1 "CEASED TO BE NATIVE LAND." The, Chief Justice: The land hhd ceased to be native land. Mr Justice Hosking: If you have evict tion by title paramount the law provides its own adjustment. Mr Hampton, Yes, that has been the custom for years. The Chief Justice: The Native Land Court has to deal With native land affairs. This is not in any sense a rati ve land affair. It is a European matter. Mr Jusliee Salmond: The ease entirely depends on the proper construction of section 91 of the Public Works Act, and the _ question is the jurisdiction of the Native Land Court, which normally extends to all cases of ownership of natives. excluded because the native owners have given up their right to compensation. There was considerable further discussion. after which the court reserved its decision.