RATING APPEAL

Taranaki Daily News, 14 October 1930, Page 9

RATING APPEAL

INGLEWOOD COUNCIL CASE

CROWN AND POWER OF SALE JUDGE BLAIR’S JUDGMENT ARGUMENT AT WELLINGTON By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellingtonfi Oct. 13. All important rating case came betofo the Court of Appeal to-day in an .appeal of the Crown from the judgment of Mr. Justice Blair, delivered, in the eafee of H.M. the King v. the Mayor of .Inglewood and the Inglewood Borough Council in August. A discharged .soldier named Marshall "purchased a farm. in the Inglewood borough the unimproved value of which was £ll5O. Subsequently there was registered against Marshall’s title a memorandum of mortgage to the Crown under which, there wa.s owing at the material limes £2449 16s sd. Marshall’s name appeared on the borough rate roll • as owner and occupier arid he paid all the-rates up. to. May, 1925. The rates for the years, ending March, 1920, 1927 and'' 1928 Were demanded but not paid and the statutory penalty of 10 per cent, accrued thereon, the amount then due being £l9l 12s lOd. In March, ■■ 1928, the borough obtained judgment against Marshall for the ovef-due-rates and costa, but in November, 1927, notice of. intention to exercise .power of dale in the mortgage wan given by the- Crown to Marshall, and in ; 1928 ths Grown made various attempts i to sell the property without result. Marshall abandoned the property in December, 1927. The Crown did nob give the borough notice that it had entered into possession, but the Commissioner of Crown Lands, let the property for grazing rights. In June, 1929, a certificate of judgment against Marshall was forwarded to the supreme Court, New Piy- ’ mouth, and notice given to the Gom- „ missioner and Marshall that the property would be sold or leased by public auction after six months from that date unless tlie amount of i the judgincut and coSts was paid. / •.. The Crown ill June, 1929, sold 'the ' property to a man named Life, and at the date of the transfer £341 8s 7d was owing for rates.-The' question then arose as. to the of the CroWii as mortgagee and an originating summons was issued. .. i- - ' Mr. Justice ‘Blair, in the course of the resultant judgment, held that while tho borough was not entitled to proceed directly against thb Crown as. mortgagee, it was nevertheless entitled ? to exercise against the Crown all the powers of safe as conferred by section 79 of the Rating Act, 1920.. the Crown is now appealing from this decision. For respondent Mr. L. M. Moss and Mr. W. Heine are appearing, and for appellant the SolicitorGeneral, Mr. A. C. Fair, K.C., and Mr. A. E. Currie. On the Bench are the f Chief Justice, Sir Michael Myers and Justices Sir Alexander Herdman ■ rind Smith and Kennedy. Mt. Fair, for the Crown, said the issues of law arising in the case were: (1) Did section 97 of the Bating Act, 1925, empower a local body which had obtained judgment ’ for rates on land .-'mortgaged to the Crown to have the . 1 land sold free of the Crown’s mortgage i and for a sum less than would provide j ,for the- payment of the debt to the Crowh? - (2) If the Crown sold under the powers in its mortgage could the land thereafter be sold by a local body unj- det judgment for rates due p\ior to the sale by the Crown? Mr. Fair sub- ■ mitted the answer to both questions should be in the negative, lie eontend- ■ ed that section 79 of the Rating Act gave the local body priority Only so fat its the public rights were Concerned, and did not affect the rights vested in the CrOWn. - s The Court adjourned till to-morrow.