FAILURE TO PAY WAGES.

Colonist, Volume LV, Issue 13647, 12 February 1913, Page 7

FAILURE TO PAY WAGES.

JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFJ 1.

Reserved judgment was given in the case of the Inspector of. Factories v. John Pauling, of the Temperance Hotel, charged with failing to pay Mary Russell, an employee, wage^ due to her. -The charge was laid as from 25th January. 1913. Tho employee left the emplovme.p,t of the defendant on 25th November, 1912. Her wages were 15s per week, payable fortnightly. On the date slio left she received £2, but. the back payments were- in arrears. The amount due for the previous -fortnight had not been paid. Thc^ages book . had been •signed by the cmp y lo,y€^,..but the Magistrate said he was satisfied that' notwithstanding the signmg pf .the book the wages had not been%aid in full. There . was no appropriation, of 'payment in?'respect of, the £2, and. he rm.ust.'assumi.' that the wages, for the fortniglit-endinc; 23rd November Was paid*by the £2, arid the 10s must be apportidned to the further back :arrears. This 3eft the" wages for the fortiiight ending.9J;h November wholly unpaid, and they >vere jstill..unpaid on 25th January.. It. was contended ! that the " offence Was a" continuing offence, and he agi'eed with, this. -The penalty was 5s ,-per day for each day after 14.that the wages w^ere unpaid, but that, did not necessarily make it a continuing offence. The offence was "failing for 1.4-days to pay wages due." This •offence was complete after the rexuiration of 14 days and might beV'slied for. He was of 'opinion, which was ■supported T>y authorities, that the present was not a continuing offence, but only an increasing peualty. and that the vKM-iod of limitation set out in section 43 applied. This section provided that proceedings shall be commenced within one month after the offence is committed if thp maximum penalty does not exceed £10, and within three, months in any other case. As there was no fixed maximum in'this cose the Magistrate held that throe months' was the period of limitation, and the proceedings were therefore in-order, but- the dat? charged v.'cs wrong. The failure to pay wages •occurred- on November 9th, and the offence-.- was completed on November 'Mth. The informationI'alleged Jjahuary--9.5th. The showed the 24th November and he amended the - date accordingly.-' Defendant would be/ convicted and fined Bs. In addition defendant was ordered to pay costs amounting to lof.. ■ ? -