FLOODING OF THE LEITH.

Otago Witness, Issue 3954, 24 December 1929, Page 10

FLOODING OF THE LEITH.

CLAIM AGAINST HARBOUR BOARD. SETTLEMENT EFFECTED. The action in which M. Stevenson, Ltd , claimed £650 damages from the Otago’ Harbour Board as a sequel to the flooding of the Leith in March last was finally disposed of in the Supreme Court on Tuesday before his Honor Mr Justice Kennedy. Mr Hay appeared on behalf of the plaintiff firm, and the defendant was represented by Mr A. C. Stephens. When the case was called on Mr Hay said he was pleased to be able to announce that the parties had come to a settlement. He asked that the case lie struck out. Mr Stephens stated that all concerned were satisfied with the terms arranged. The case was struck out. The action arose out of the disastrous flood which occurred in the Leith on March 19 of the present year. There were several claims against the Harbour Board, ami it was agreed between the parties concerned that the case brought by M. Stevenson, Ltd., should be made a test one and that the writs issued by the others, reaching a total of nearly £12,000, should not be served until .his case was disposed of. Messrs F. J. Williams, E. Fletcher Roberts, and W. D. R. M'Curdie were retained by the plaintiff firm to assist in its case.

<What led up to the settlement of the cases was the result of a conference between representatives of both sides. At that conference they were all anxious to know what was to be done to prevent Hooding in the future; in fact, they were more concerned about the future than about their present looses. The outcome of the conference was that it was agreed that the engineers mentioned above should be allowed to confer with the engineers (Messrs Alexander. Wilkie, and Mac Lean) who had been appointed to advise as to the best means of dealing with the Leitii and to report to the claimants whether the scheme of the three engineers, if carried into effect, would prevent future injury as a re-ult of floods from that source. The engineers met, and, after careful consideration, they sent to Mr Stevenson a formal letter to the effect that they entirely approved of the scheme to be promulgated. The greatest concern of all was the future control of the Leith. Tin representatives of both sides agreed that the Leith should be under the control of one body and that that body should be a river board to control the course of the stream. » The re-ult has be ui that the Haroour Board has given its honourable undertaking to use its influence to promote legislation for the purpose of creating a river board, whose duty it will be to make alterations to the Leith to prevent flooding in the future. If no river board is created the Harbour Board gives an assurance of its intention io see that the Leith is made reasonably safe so as to prevent flooding in the future. The board points out that its own property would suffer from floods, and the claimants can rest assured that it will do something substantial.

The result i- that the action brought by M. Stevenson. Ltd., has been withdrawn and that the others associated with that firm have signed their willingness to abandon their claims, the total of which amounts to £ll,OOO. It is hoped that the Harbour Board will set to work at once to carry out the part it has promised to do, and if this is done at once it is felt by the claimants that Dunedin should be reasonably free from flooding from the Leith in future. The terms of tbe settlement arrived at are as follow: — (1) That the Otago Harbour Board, without binding itself by contract so to do. will use its best influence to secure the constitution of a river board with rating powers for the purpose of controlling the Leith and take steps to prevent future flooding. 2. That the Otago Harbour Board will pay the sum of £350 to the plaintiff forthwith to cover its costs and expenses in regard to its action and also the sura of £5O to cover the expenses of the other claimants who have signed their undertaking to sign an agreement to join ip the settlement and withdraw their actions, such sum of £5O to be distributed as the plaintiff’s solicitors decide. 3. All plans prepared by the plaintiff’s engineers for the purposes of this action will be handed to the board and become its property. 4. On payment of the said sums the present action shall be struck out.

It is understood that 13 other claimants joined in the settlement.