IMPORTANT JUDGMENT SUMMONS DECISION.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 12471, 30 September 1902, Page 5

IMPORTANT JUDGMENT SUMMONS DECISION.

,(Peb United Press association.} WELLINGTON, September 29. A judgment given today by the Chief Justice seems calculated to greatly limit tho power to punish judgment debtors who make default. The case was one in which on the Bth Slay Charlotte Burgess obtained judgment for £10 4s sd, wages due, against Daniel Coronno,- who obtained a loan by mortgaging hia plant. On the 23rd May Charlotte Burgess issued -a judgment summons against Coronno for the amount of the previous judgment. The hearing took place on tho 24-th June, the magistrate making an qrder against the debtor for committal to prison in default of payment. Counsel for the defendant debtor now moved in the Supremo Court for prohibition in respect of execution of the-" judgment order on the ground that the absence of proof that debtor had 1 means at the time of the hearing of the summons deprived the magistrate of jurisdiction to make a committal order. His Honor said that, in making the order, the magistrate held that it had been proved that i; the defendant had money of hie own, which he had refused to pay to the judgment creditor," but the latter provisions of sub-section 5 of section 8 of the act of 1874had been repealed by the 1900 act, consequently "there i* only left a case where a debtor ' has,' not ' had, , money of hie own, which he has refused to pay. In this case the only evidence is that on the 9 th. May he had money, and did not then pay. Such proof does not authorise tho committal of a debtor to prison. It would, no doubt, have authorised a committal under the 1874 act. The magistrate has apparently road ' has' ns applicable to the period subsequent to tho judgment, but prior to the issue or hearing of the judgment summons. In my opinion it cannot be so read. There is therefore no evidence that at the time of hearing tho judgment the debtor had then any money in his possession, hence no authority to issue an order of imprisonment. This construction will, no doubt, much limit the power to punish for not paying debts <M<?, lmt that seems to have been the intention of the Legislature." Prohibition was therofore granted, with £5 Ss costs and disbureements.