SUPREME COURT.—IN BANCO.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 1943, 23 March 1868, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.—IN BANCO.

Hia Honor, Mr Justice Chapman, sat in Banco on Saturday, to enable cases to %c mentioned, ho aa to Have time, with a view to motions hereafter.

Skatok v. Ghovbs.—Mr Macassey said tliat in this caae there was a verdict for the plaintiff, in an action for forfeiture by breach of covenant Before the plaintiff signed judgment, it waa intended to move for a rule nin ; but he was not at present prepared to state "the precise form of the rule which would bo asked for.

Smith v. 'Fur. NkwZbat,anu Inhttranck Company.-~ln this case, Mr Macaaacy said that the defendants would move on the points reserved. Nbw Zkaj-and an'o Avtbthauan Land Company (LuriTKo) v. Boyes ani> ■Otwkks. Mr Macaasey said that the 4efendantß proposed to move. The Judge : It is not necessary to mention Hub ease. There is no execution to be stayed : it was only a finding of issues of fact. Mr Macasscy : I have a right to ask that the issue shall be re-tried ; and it might be said, unless I mentioned the caae to-day, that I had forfeited my right to make such an application. Commkju,tai. Bank or Nkw Zealand (Limitkd) v. Hutchison—Mr B. C. Haggitt said that it was the defendant's intention to move for a new trial. The Judge : There were no points reserved ; and I think y«,,u should state the frounds on which you mean to move. Mr Haggitt B,tid that the grounds were —verdict contrary to the evidence ; verdict against the weight of evidence ; erroneous admission of evidence ; and the discovery of material evidence since the trial, which the defendant could not have obtained before the hearing, Latham ». Macanukbw (Supisiu.vtbndbnt) —Mr Haggitt said that the defendant would move for a non-suit on the points reserved—l. That there was no notice of trial; 2. On the question of right-of-way. Tho Judge: Ido not think there is anything in the right-of-way point. Wkimtkk v. Macuun.—Mr E. P. Kenyon said that the defendant would move, on the grounds— X. That the -damages were excessive (by the inclusion •of interest); 2. That • material evidence had been discovered since the trial. Kk Alkxandbr MimuiKAii, In.solvknt. —Mr H. Howorth Baid that the time within which the creditors could apply for adjudication of bankruptcy expired to-day ; but the insolvent could not himself apply until Monday. He (Mr ■Howorth) did not know whether, seeing ■that there would not bo a sitting on Monday, or for some time after, His Honor would allow the insolvent now to apply. Tho Judge : 1 do not think I have power to adjudicate to-day. Mr Howorth : I think tho Rules do not prevent it : they refer to vacations -only in connection with tho delivery of pleadings, The Judge : The Judges at Home do not sit during vacation : even when a judg-

meat is delivered in vacation, the Judges Wsh always ask permission. Our vacation has ■ commenced. lam only sitting to-day at the request of the profession generally, to enable time to be saved ; and that request I accept as equivalent to a consent. It is another matter, my acting under the Bankruptcy Act. Mr Iloworth : Tho Act seems to take no notice whatever of tho vacations of the Supreme Court. But 1 shall bo •content if your Honor will allow the Itegistrar to take a note that I applied to-day. The Judge : That shall be done. 11k John Adamh.—Mr W. D. Stewart -aaid that he had intended to apply for adjudication of bankruptcy in the case of ■ John Adams. Tho time had expired ; l>ut after tho opinion Just expressed, lie (Mr Stewart) did not know whether His dlonor would grant adjudication. The Judi;e : Ab the time has expired, you may take adjudication at the risk of its being superseded. Mr Stewart consented. Revisino Oiticek.—MrE. P. Kenyon •was sworn as a Revising 0/ficer tinder the Registration of Electors Act, 18GG. The Court was adjourned.