DISTRICT COURT.

Colonist, Volume L, Issue 12159, 6 February 1908, Page 6 (Supplement)

DISTRICT COURT.

I Yesterday his Honor Judge Jlasel- t den delivered judgment in the case j of Jano Goldng, of Bainham, \_ against Charles J. Jell'ries. of Bain- r j bam, and George Harris, bailiff of c the Court at Collingwood. Mr \ Hayes appeared for tbn plaintiff, a and i»lr LJnrley and Mr Atkinson for j the defendants. His Honor stat- j cd :— t The plaintiff was the owner, of cerj| | tain chattels which the defendants seized and sold, uuder^warrant of distress issued in an action in the , Magistrate Court, in which Jeffries \ was the plaintiff, and the husband of the present plaintiff was defendant. Harris is the bailiff of tie Court. Jeffries obtained judgment against th 3 plaintiff's husband for damages sustained in an assault com ) rnitted by Golding on Jeffries. The latter gave Harris written instruc- , tions to seize the chattels in ques- ' tion, and indemnified him against . the consequences. After the seizure i the plaintiff gave Harris formal \ notice that the -horses and chattels '. seized were her property. The ( plaintifl did not pay the charges of keeping po9seession of the horses until the interpleader could be heard. An interpleader summons was is- , sued; but "on coming for hearing the Stipendiary Magistrate stiuck it ' on the ground that the plaintiff had ( not paid the fees for possession as prescribed by the Magistrate's Court Act, 1893. His Honor said the law on the subject was plain. If tho claimant to the goods seized pay into Court the amount, etc., to be levied under the warrant, and the fees and expenses of execution, the bailiff must deliver the- goods seized to the claimant, or if the claimant pay the costs of keeping possession until an interpleader summons could be heard, the Bailiff must keep possession until the interpleader is heard, or the {bailiff may jor his own protection issue an interpleader sucumons in order to try the question of ownership, irf the baiilff doe 3 not adopt the last procedure he t proceeds at his own risk, and if he sells another person's goods he is liable to ac action to that "person. His Honor said it was a i case where the execution creditor had caused the goods of a third" person to be sold, such person neither consenting nor standing by ; -fest not having lodged the money necessary to compel the plaintiff g issue an interpleader summons in order to try the rights of the contesting parties. After quoting authorities his Honor said the plaintiff had proved her title to the goods, and is therefore entitled to receive tqe value from the defendants. It had not been urged that the defen - dant Jeffries is protected in any way, and considering his instrctions to Jth© bailiff, he is jointly liable. Judgment was given for the plaintiff for £10; solicitors' fee. .I*3 10s: Court costs, £2 12s; witnesses' costs. £G Bs.