TRAM SHED NOT FACTORY

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19455, 14 October 1937, Page 15

TRAM SHED NOT FACTORY

COURT ALLOWS APPEAL (P«r Press Association.) WELLINGTON, this day. The Full Court to-day delivered judgment in the case of the Wellington City Corporation v. Percy Henry Kinsman, inspector of factories, heard on October 6. This appeal from the decision of Mr W. F. Stilwell, S.M., was allowed. The court held that the corporation's tram sheds were not a factory within the meaning of the Factories’ Act, 1921-1922 and its amendments, and accordingly that the conviction of the corporation must be quashed.

DISMISSAL OF APPEAL DAMAGE DONE BY DOG (Par Press Association.) WELLINGTON, this day. The Full Court to-day delivered judgment in the case of Adalbert Joseph Tobin v. Agnes Dorman and William Fullerton Dorman heard in September. This appeal from the judgment of Mr. J. 11. Luxford, S.M., who found that the appellant, at whose house a dog belonging to his daughter was kept, was liable for £55 damages done by it in killing lambs and sheep, was dismissed by the Full Court.

ADOPTION ORDER DISPUTE FAILURE OF APPEAL (Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, this day. A judgment was delivered by the Court ol' Appeal to-day in the case Robert Victor Tipene v. Tutua Teone, heard in September. The judgment in this appeal from the decision of Mr. Justice Reed stated that there was an insurmountable obstacle against the appellant succeeding in that no valid adoption order had been made which was relied upon bv the appellant to support his case. ‘The’ joint judgment of Mr. Justice Ostler, Mr. Justice Smith and Mr. .Justice Fair came to a like conclusion that an oral pronouncement of an adoption order by a stipendiary magistrate in 1900 was not a valid adoption order under the Adoption of Children Act, 1895. The appeal accordingly was dismissed.

NEGLIGENCE NOT SHOWN THIRD PARTY RISK CASE (Po? Press Association.) WELLINGTON, this day. The Appeal Court to-day delivered judgment in the case of the Commercial Union Assurance Company, Ltd., v. the Colonial Carrying Company of New Zealand, Ltd., heard in September. In this case, which was removed for determining the construction of section C (1) of the Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third Party Risks) Act, 1928, it was held by the Chief Justice that the term “use” as therein employed necessarily implied the negligent use of a motor-vehicle as such. In the presont case there was no negligent use ol' the lorry, and accordingly the question asked must be answered in the negative. Separate judgments coming to the same conclusion were delivered by Mr. Justice Ostler, Mr. Justice Fair, and Mr. Justice Smith.