DEFINITION OF OPEN SPACE AS FACTORY?

Southland Times, Issue 23444, 26 February 1938, Page 20

DEFINITION OF OPEN SPACE AS FACTORY?

CASE TO BE SUBMITTED TO FULL COURT (United Press Association) CHRISTCHURCH, February 24. Emphasizing the far-reaching effects a decision on the case would have, Mr Justice Northcroft, after hearing the appeal of Charles Edward Otley, manager of C. E. Otley Ltd., against a conviction in the Magistrate’s Court for a breach of the Factories Act, suggested to counsel it might be advisable to refer the case to the adjudication of the Full Court, which would be sitting in Wellington shortly. Appellant was convicted and fined £2 by Mr E. C. Lewey, S.M., for a breach of the Factory Amendment Act 1936, Section 14, in that being the occupier of a factory he failed to pay timber stackers and yard labourers for the Labour Day holiday. He appealed against this conviction. If counsel desired his decision he would take time to consider it, his Honour said, but a more binding decision than the opinion of one judge might be preferable. The question amounted to whether an open space could be deemed to be a factory within the meaning and scope of the Factories Act by reason of the activities carried on there. If this was so then the operation of threshing mills and other agricultural machinery might possibly make a farmer’s paddock a factory under the Act. After the Court had adjourned to enable counsel to discuss Mr Justice Northcroft’s suggestion they informed him that they had agreed to submit the case to the Full Court.