Uncommon Common Sense

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 68, Issue 5944, 17 May 1944, Page 6

Uncommon Common Sense

“Bottle, 15s; half-bottle, 7s 9d; lOoz flasks, 6s; soz flasks, 3s 7d; miniatures 2s 3d; draught bottle, 14s 6d; per measured nips, lid, with soda, 3d extra.” Thus, in relation to sales byretail of Australian whisky in the district of Rockhampton, ran the language of a Commonwealth Price Regulation Order, writes “Scriblex” in the New Zealand Law Journal. A prosecution having been brought in respect of the sale of a 260 z bottle at £3, it was contended that the order was invalid on the grounds of vagueness or uncertainty, as “bottle” was not a measure of quantity. This view found favour with the magistrate, but has been unanimously rejected by five Judges of the High Court. The words which make the most robust appeal are those of Mr Justice Rich: “As to the word ‘bottle’ that is a word in the vernacular which needs no proof. Moreover, buyer and seller were well acquainted with trade usage and . . . both parties recognised what was demanded and what was sold. This is a case where technicalities should not run riot and where common sense—which is not common—should prevail.”