Page 12 Advertisements Column 5

NZ Truth, Issue 878, 23 September 1922, Page 12

is stored on the farm of a third party and used by him. Wages are not paid as agreed. Has the worker any claim for wages, against person on whose property hay was stored and by whom it is 'being' used? — "Haymaker." ,A.: No; your claim "is only against the person for whom you engaged to work: . . . Q.: Does epidemic pension cease for children at the remarriage of the mother?— "P.M." A.: The so-called epidemic pension is more m the. nature of a grant than a pension made m cases of distress arising out of the influenza epidemic. No one can claim it as of right. The matter is left entirely m the hands of the Commissioner of Pensions to make a grant or discontinue it at his will. No doubt if a widow, m receipt of a pension were to marry the Commissioner would discontinue the grant. Q.: Person working for Public Works Department gives order to another to be paid a certain amount out of his wages m satisfaction of a debt. The department now refuses to recognise the order unless the worker signs a discharge for his wages. Can department be compelled to recognise the order? A.: The department is not bound to recognise the order if it is simply an open, order to "pay monej', but if the order is coupled with a direction to pay out of any particular fund, such as "out of my wages," the order <will be an equitable assignment and bind- , ing on the department. '""■■?:■■, LegaJ; Q.:, Person has lease of 50-acre farm; adjoining owner removes boundary, fence 28 years ago, thereby fencing out' about four acres which has since been occupied by person occupying 50-acre farm. Can the owner of .adjoining farm now claim this four acres either against lessee of 50-acre farm or owner of same? A. : If the land is held under Deeds Title Leasehold he cannot claim to recover it after it has been continuously adversely occupied for 20 years. His title to the land is then extinguished unless he has during' the 28 years exercised any acts of ownership m the land m question. If, however, the land is under the Land Transfer Act, then the registered proprietor does not lose his title by adverse occupation after the title is issued. Q-: Two persons agree with owner to take lease of farm. Document is drawn up and signed by one of the prospective lessees, the other objecting to some of the terms and refusing to sign. Meanwhile person that has signed goes into possession and does considerable work .on farm. Owner now threatens to eject this person and relet farm. Has the person who went into possession and performed the work on the farm any remedy? — "Justice." A.: It is difficult. to advise on the exact position without knowing the detailed circumstances, but it would seem on the facts supplied that the owner is quite within his rights m doing what he threatens to do as he made a contract with both tenants and is entitled to the securuity of both. If the tenants are partners and one by unreasonable action loses the lease the other J who has effected the improvements would probably have an action against him for the damage. Q-: Shopkeeper supplies minor with goods on '• credit. Minor now married. Can shopkeeper now recover price of goods? — "Curious." A.: Infancy is a good defence to any claim the shopkeeper may bring unless the goods supplied can be- considered necessaries' What are necessaries is a question to be decided according to the facts : of the particular caseQ.: Can articles left m enquirer's possession by third party be seized and sold m satisfaction of a debt due by first party, and, if sold, could such articles be recovered? — "G.D.'V A.: Only the goods of the debtor himself can properly be seized and sold. Third party could, if. she knew nothing of seizure and sale at the time of such, sue the person seizing the goods or the person m possession of same for their return or value. Q.: Would a docket mortgage be as eff ective to secure a sum of money to a lender as a proper deed or memorandum, of mortgage? — •"H.A.J." A.: Know of no such document as a docket mortgage m New Zealand. The safest and best way* to secure money lent on land is by a proper deed or memorandum of mortgage. Q. : Person owes another a sum for board. What is latter's best means of recovering same, and, if by summons, where " would action have to be I brought? — "Constant Reader." \A.: If you have nothing belonging to' boarder that you could claim a lien on your best course is to sue him m the Magistrate's Court. You could issue a summons from the Court nearest to where the defendant resides, or, if you so chose, at the place where the cause of action arose— that is, where you provided him with the board and he refused to pay for same. Q.: Does a married man, not yet 25 years old ; have to attend military parade ? — "Subscriber." . A.: Yes, he must attend until he attains the age of 25 years, when he is entitled to be transferred: into the Reserve. Q.: (1) What distance from boundary fence has adjoining neighbour to plant his shelter trees and what steps can be taken to compel neighbour to remove same? - (2) . Neighbour's fowls destroying crops. What notice has owner of crops to give before he can shoot, same? — "C.C.L.C." A.: (1) The Fencing Act' prohibits the planting of trees "on or alongside" a boundary line or fence, but dobsnot specify what distance from the boundary such trees may be planted. A. distance of one foot ' would certainfy seem "alongside" the boundary. You must first proceed to get an order of the court for removal of the trees m question, and then if they are not re- ; moved you may enter and cut them dow-.i; (2) You are not entitled to shoou the fowls unless you can prove that such a step was reasonably ne-~ cessary to preserve your crop from destruction. Notice to neighbour is not absolutely necessary. Q.: Father dies m England leaving property which is to be sold and money forwarded to son m New Zealand. Does Home Government taketeo much m £; if so, what?— "p.E.c." i A ll Y /V- H ° me Government- collects death duties, but cannot say at what rate m the pound. Q : Motor lorry on wharf waiting to be loaded. Horse driven vehicle collides with same, . doing damaee Is owner of latter vehicle liable for damage? ? A : Depends on whether the driver S,a ?>, latte ? VGhicle was ne SHsent and was the prime cause of the accident This depends on the whole of the circumstances of the case. thJ'Mn?^! I*61 * 6^ 1 0f th e section of the Military Service. Act providing penalties for desertion apply to mZ bers of the Australasian ?&v£ ? 01 x B S F^?-«'L.H J°'- members of the N.z!A.: The section applied , only to members of the N.Z.E.F. and its repeal would consequently only he an advantage to such members • it is possible some similar provision has been made for members of the mvni forces. " c na\ai General: Q.: (1) Does the Tasmanian GovNew Zealand Government on nrizp money^won m Tatter sails sweeps by New Zealanders ? (2) Would prize money won by a New Zealander and received by him m January m any year be liable to income tax as bein«income derived during the year ending March 31 of tho same year'— "Green Flag." A.: (1) No; (2) Tattersall's prize money is not liable to N.Z. income tax