Appeal Court
Wellington, May 11. The case of Mills V. Rogers and another was taken before the Chief Justice, and Judges Williams, Dennistbn, and Coaolly. This is an appeal from Judge Denniston. In answer to Mr Mills recent suit against his solicitors in the libel actions against the Christchurch Press ' and the ' Otago Daily Times,' they set up the defence that the alleged agreement as to a division of the costs and the amount recovered was illegal and void on the ground of champerty and maintenance. Mr Justice Denniston upheld this defence, and decided that it was competent for them to set it up, and farther that they were not liable on the ground of negligence in not advising Mills that the agreement was illegal and void. His Honor held that in the matter of the agreement the defendants were not acting as solicitors for the plaintiff, but were simply partners with him, and not under an obligation to advise him. Mr Bell, and with him Mr McCallum, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Jellicoe for the defendents. The argument of Mr Bell was not concluded- when the Court rose.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TC18990512.2.18.7
Bibliographic details
Colonist, Volume XLII, Issue 9477, 12 May 1899, Page 3
Word Count
190Appeal Court Colonist, Volume XLII, Issue 9477, 12 May 1899, Page 3
Using This Item
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.