Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

APPEAL COURT.

LIABILITY FOR SHARKS. PJSR PRKSB ASSOCIATION. Wellisqton, Octobar 22. The Appeal Court i* eogiged in hearing the case, New Zea'and Flour Millers' Co-operative Association v. Timaru Milling Company, in which is involved the legali'y of trusts or trtde combinations in New Zeahnd. The directors of the company agreed to tike 150 shares in the association, but being advised tbey had not tho power to do so repudiated the agreement, and t'te association now seeks to enforce the payment of £l5O. Two questions are involved: (1) Whether the agreement between the association and millers, regulating the prices and output, is void and unenforceable as contrary to publio policy, and in restraint of trade; (2) and whether it is in the powe- of the company to enter into such an agreement, if valid. Plaintiffs' counsel contended tint the restraint imposed did not go further than was reasonably necessity for protecting the interests of the parties concerned. The object of the agreement was merely t.> put an end to ruinous competition, and the sources of supply were quite sufficient to prevent the public interest being pr<-judical y afiected. English authorities were quoted to show tbat an agreement m«y be good even if in partial restraint of trade and likely to enhance prices. The Trades Union Act reeogniel the right of employers to combine, and ihe Conciliation and Arbitration Act goes in thefamo direction. As to tbe powe' tf the company t'i taVe up tharee, this was plainly authotisul by the articles of association. Counsel for (he defendants said the main reason for defending ths action was that the rompiny bad benn advised tha trausaction was cot within its power. He submitted that every decided case was against an agreement being enforced. The Trades Union Act contained an express provision that no such agreements should be enforced by the Courts, and this position was not repodel by tho Conciliation and Arbitration Act. Tho case was not concluded.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19011029.2.13

Bibliographic details

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXIII, Issue 255, 29 October 1901, Page 2

Word Count
325

APPEAL COURT. Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXIII, Issue 255, 29 October 1901, Page 2

APPEAL COURT. Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXIII, Issue 255, 29 October 1901, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert