THE BRUNNER MINE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 11113, 14 May 1898, Page 6

THE BRUNNER MINE.

THE CASE BEFORE THE APPEAL COURT. (Per United Psbss Association.) Wellington, May 13. The case Geoghegan and another v. the Grey mouth-Point Elizabeth Railway and Coal Company (Limited) and. others was argued before the Pull Courb of Appeal to-day.' This is a special 'case stated by the parties and ordered to be.removed into the Court of Appeal. . -The action, is one brought by the plaintiffs, ■as representing themselves and all other persons who recently recovered damages against the defendant in oonrieotidn with the Brunner mine accident, to enforce on , their own behalf the charge on the mine' and plant given them by section 53 of "The Coal &iines Act, 1891." The action is brought against the company and Messrs Brand and Macdonald as trustees for the holders of debantures issued by the company. These debentures gave the holders a charge on the undertaking and property of the company. Section 53 of " The Coal Minc-s;Act, ( '1891," gives the representatives of persons killed in a mine owing to the negligence "of the' owner of the mine the right to recovery from the owner compensation by way of damages as for a tort committed for such owner; Tho ; questions for the opieion of the court are (1) | whether the trustees for the debentute-holders have priority of lien over the plaintiffs in respect of the charge on the mine and plant, and (2) whether the trustees or plaintiffs are entitled to the coal gotten at the date of the plaintiff'a judgment. Mr Bell is appearing for the trustees ari&'for thß debenture-holders; Mr Jellicoe for the plaintiffs. . Argument was not concluded when the Court of Appeal rose to-day. The principal points .j discussed were:—Whether by virtue of section 53 of the " Coal Mines Ace, 1891," aey mort- i gage or charge which a Goal Mining Company can give to debenture-holders j or others must be taken to be. sub- ! ject to any charge afterwards to arise ; under section 53 in favour of the persons named in that section, or whether, the Legislature not having expressly made the charge given by section 53 a first charge, it must be taken, to be j subjectjto any incumbra-cces prior to date given by the company ; also whether in this particular j case the claim of the detanture-holders was bad ! as regards portion of the property of the company consisting of cbatola, on the ground that neither debentures nor wust deed uor mortgage were ever registered under " The Chattels Transfer Act, 1839." The ease will be resumed j on Monday morning. ■ '■