SUPREME COURT

Otago Witness, Issue 3309, 15 August 1917, Page 21

SUPREME COURT

IN BANCO. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Sim.) AN INJUNCTION GRANTED.

Peter and John Boyd v. Frederick Strickland (Palmcrston North).—This was a claim for an injunction and £250 damages for an infringement of a copyright. Mr Hay, for tho plaintiffs, said that the defendant had consented to an injunction and to judgment for £25 damages. A further £25 had been paid in cash, so that really the judgment was for £SO. Mr Scurr for the defendant, said that the £SO included costs. Judgment was given for plaintiffs in terms of tho draft judgment. ACCLIMATISATION SOCIETY'S RIGHTS. The Otago Acclimatisation Society v. the Southland Acclimatisation Society.— Motion for an injunction. Mr W. O. MacGregor, with Mr Allan, appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr Russell for the defendants. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs said the question was whether the Southland Society had a right to take trout ova for the purpose of pisciculture from any stream within the Otago society's district, or oonversly had the Otago society the right" to prevent tho Southland society from so doing? Mr Kuiisell stated that the defendants relied on the point that tho recrulation under which the case was brought was ultat vires, in that it interfered with the public rights established by the Fisheries Act. An officer duly appointed under the act had the right to take fish from one stream and place them in another irrespective of any regulations. There was no statutory authority in the Act justifying the forming of these regulations, and therefore they were ultra vires. _ ?His Honor reserved his decision. A RESERVED JUDGMENT.

His Honor delivered his reserved judgment in the case in re Milne (deceased), between Jennie Welsh Milne (Messrs Payno and Brasch) and John James Cunningham, Ethelbert Cann Smith (Mr E. C. Smith), and James Milne, and William Southwood Milne (Mr A. S. Adams), this being an application for an order extending the time for making an application under the Family Protection Act, 190 S, and also for an order making provision for her maintenance out of her father's estate. „ His Honor said: In my opinion an extension of time should not be granted in any case where the claimant, after becoming aware of his rights, had been guilty of long and inexcusable delay in bringing the matter before tho court. There has been such delay in the present case, and on that ground I think the application for an extension must be refused. The first year expired on Deceinber 1, 1915. Within a fortnight after trTat date the plaintiff knew what her rights were. Before the end of January she knew that there was no_ chance of an amicable settlement of her claim, and yet she did not take any effective steps in the matter until the following November. In the meantime the executors apparently treated her claim as abandoned, and transferred the farm to the residuary legatees. If it be tho case, as contended by MiAdams (counsel for James and William Milne), that the two other pecuniary legatees cannot be added now as parties to tho present proceedings, because more than two years have elapsed since the grant of probate, that is another ground for refusing tho application; for if the plaintiff were entitled to relief it is probable that the pecuniary legacies would have to be applied in satisfying the plaintiff's claims, and the .residuary legatees would be prejudiced, therefore, if resort could not be had to those legacies. The result is that the plaintiff's summons must be dismissed. In the view that I have taken of the case it is not necessary to come to any definite conclusion as to the merits of the plaintiff's claim for maintenance. A just father would not be entitled to provide for one child out of property which morally, if not legally, belonged to another child, and there is considerable force, therefore, in Mr Adams's argument that in tho circumstances the plaintiff would not be entitled to any relief at the expense of the residuary legatees. Mr Adams intimated that he did not ask for costs on behalf of the beneficiaries. His Honor allowed costs, seven guineas and disbursements to the executors. CIVIL SITTINGS. Monday, August 13. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Sim.) Peter F. A. Robertson (of Lawrence, carpenter) v. George Linkiater of Waitahuna, farmer).—This was a claim for £IOOO damages.—The plaintiff, in his statement of claim, stated that he was riding a bicycle on the Main road, Waitahuna to Lawrence, and tho defendant was driving a motor car in tho opposite direction. The car collided with the bicycle, causing the defendant to sustain a compound fracture of the left arm and thigh.—The defendant, in his dofence, said he was driving with proper care and skill, and the plaintiff endeavoured to pass him on the wrong side. The bicycle either skidded or was turned too sharply, and the plaintiff fell, striking the left eido of the motor car. Mr A. S. Adams appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr A. C. Hanlon for the defendant. The case was to have been heard before a jury, but a notico of discontinuance of tho trial having been filed, the jury was discharged. Mr Adams said he had agreed with Mr Hanlon that judgment be given for the defendant for 20 guineas, and disbursements and court fees, so as to save any further application having to be made to the court. Judgment was given accordingly. WATERSIDE WORKER'S CLAIM William H. Perry (waterside worker) v. tho Union Steam Ship Company.—Claim £6OO damages, through being hurt while working on one of the defendants' boats. Mr C. G. White (for the defendants) appeared in support of a summons for an adjournment of the hearing of the case. Mr A. IS. Adams (for the plaintiff) said ho realised that Mr White had had several difficulties in connection with the case, while there v.-ere a good many difficulties on the other side. His learned friend had agreed that when the case came for trial it shoirrd be before a common jury. His Honor adjourned the hearing of the caso until the November sittings, the defondants undertaking not to have tho trial by a special jury. OTHER CENTRES. AUCKLAND, August 10. In the Supreme Court, William Williams was sentenced to two years' hard labour

and declared an habitual criminal on charges of a serifs of thefts.

Patrick Collins, for indecent assault, vraa ordered to undergo reformative treatment not. exceeding five years. WELLINGTON, -August 10. An ex-civil servant, Herbert Eaton Eadcliffe, was charged with having, on September 6, 1916, stolen £l5O, and on a later date. £55 Is lOd, the "property of the New Zealand Government. In opening for the defence, Mr Wilford pointed out accused's good financial position, and claimed that when Radcliffo committed tho acts for which he was being tried, ho had no criminal intention, and. owing to disease, ho was not capable of forming a criminal intention. His Honor Mr Justice Hosking, in summing up, said that it had been suggested that disease had a considerable bearing upon the question of intent, but medical evidence seemed to fall very far short of what tho court was led to expect from the opening address of counsel for the defence Tho fact that accused was not in want of money made it more difficult to account for thai act. The jury retired at 3.15 o'clock, and at 8.10 p.m. reported a disagreement. His Honor ordered a nc\v trial for Thursday next. Accused was released on bail. August 11. In the Supreme Court Marcas Joseph Patrick 'yeogh was charged with forging an application for a newspaper reporter's railway ticket. After a retirement lasting-three-quarters of an hour the jury returned a verdiot of not guilty. .\ugust 13. i In the Supreme Court William Pveynolds, a returned soldier, was charged with striking Berti Parker on May 30, pausing his death, and thereby committing tho crimo of manslaughter. Tho jury returned a ver« diet of not guilty.