PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

Southland Times, Issue 22999, 19 September 1936, Page 8

PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

JUDGE’S DECISION

LOANS BOARDS APPEAL

(United Press Association.)

Wellington, September 18. In the Supreme Court action at Gisborne in April, Herbert Victor Lunken, as a ratepayer of the Borough of Gisborne, brought an action against the Gisborne Fire Board and members of the Local Government Loans Board to set aside the Loans Board’s decision sanctioning the raising of a loan by the Gisborne Fire Board, prohibiting the Fire Board from acting on that decision and preventing the Fire Board from raising and spending money in pursuance of the loan proposals. During the hearing of the case the Loans Board was called on to produce for inspection certain documents, but this was objected to on the ground that the Minister of Finance had instructed that the documents were privileged. The Acting Chief Justice (Sir John Reed), however, made an order for the inspection of the documents with the proviso that, if after inspection by him, any were found to be detrimental to the Public Service, a supplementary order withdrawing these from inspection would be made.

The Appeal Court to-day heard an appeal against this decision by the Loans Board.

Advancing his argument for the appellant, the Loans Board, Mr Currie made the following submissions:— (1) That there was a distinction between where the Crown was a party and where it was not.

(2) That there was a further distinction where the Crown was a party in its administrative capacity and where it was a party in the discharge of some trading capacity. (3) That information was privileged, whether it was in the form of documents or not.

(4) That it was immaterial if the claim of privilege impeded a Judge in examining the facts of the case, or if it hampered one of the litigants. “Private mischief must give way to public convenience.” said the counsel. It was submitted that the question of privilege came under three headings:— (1) Cases which called for intervention by the Courts themselves to stop the production of documents. (2) Cases which called for intervention bv the executive.

(3) Cases which call for the Court’s intervention to override the claim of privilege where it had been wrongly or unjustifiably made.

Mr justice Ostler: How can the Court say that the executive is wrong unless it has a look at the document? Counsel: Extraneous circumstances may help. Mr Justice Ostler; Yes, but are there any here?

Counsel: No, The Court adjourned till Monday.