LOCALITY RATE

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 19883, 9 March 1939, Page 7

LOCALITY RATE

PAYMENT ON CONTRACTS

AWARD FIXES MINIMUM

S.M.’S DECISION DISPUTED

Mr. Justice Nortihcroft to-day heard an appeal involving a point of law of wide interest to contractors on public works, the appeal being from the decision of (the magistrate on a. claim for the differense between award and locality rates on a particular public work, namely, the Karakatuwhero bridge. The magistrate had given judgment for Hilton Hovel)!, an employee who claimed from W. J. Lop de ill, bridge contractor, the locality rate for his class of work, which rate was above that fixed' by the award for the particular class of employment. In the appeal heard to-day, Mr. D. E. Chrisp appeared for the appellant, Lopdel'l, and Mr. A. A. Whitehead for the respondent, Hovell. The magistrate's decision had been based mainly upon the obligation Which the Public Contracts Act of 1903 placed upon the employer, in the case of public works, to pay the award rate Where such rate was not below that considered fair and reasonable for the locality, the latter rate to prevail if it were the higher. The appellant claimed that where the provisions of a later Act conflicted with an earlier enactment, the later Act must be considered to represent the mind of the law-makers.

Application of Awards

In reply to His Honour, Mr. Chrisp stated that he held that the relevant section of the Public Contracts Act was an anachronism, in that it had been made operative at a time when awards did not apply all over the country, but that now that awards applied to all parts of the country, the ratds laid) down in the awards were to prevail. Mr. Chrisp also claimed that the greater part of the original claim was ruled out by a time limitation of 12. months. liis Honour asked Whether counsel regarded the matter as having a deep enough significance to require a written judgment. He was not able, to accept the view put forward by the appellant, he explained, but if counsel thought the basic argument had an application outside the contract- on \VhlCh the dispute developed, he would proceed to hear counsel for respondent; and in due course discuss the points raised. Mr. Whitehead stated that the basic point at issue had occasioned much concern, and the court’s ruling would be appreciated. At His Honour's suggestion, he then proceeded with his submissions. He stated 1 that the only application of the award to the case was in fixing the minimum rates of pay. The actual' rates for which the respondent in this case had contracted to work for the appellant were those available to him under the Public Contracts Act, ,of 1903. His Honour said that he would take time to consider the matter, judgment being reserved.