CHRISTCHURCH.
This Dat. (Before B. Beetham, Esq., 8.M.) Dbttnkbnnkss.—lsrael Luke was fined 10s for this offenoe. MisoßLiAjruoTTß. —Howard v. Hoffmann, olaim £5 Bs, for four weeks' rent of fnrniahed apartments, and milk supplied. Mr Perceval for plaintiff, Mr Deaoon for defendant. It appeared that the oooupants had been forbidden access to their rooms during the ourrenoy of a week'a tenancy, and without notioe, therefore a week's rent (16s) was deducted, and judgment was given for £4 7s and costs. —Hoffman v. Howard, olaim £60, for illegal ejeotment. This was a oross-action arising out of the former case. It was not contended that the aotion of Mrs Howard (the landlady) in refusing aooess to the rooms was justifiable, but that sbe had good reason to believe that Hoffman intended to leave without paying hiß arrears of rent, and did what she thought was best on the spur of the moment. Plaintiff's statement that he was forbidden to remove his goods was partially denied by defendant, wbo eaid she had at one time after the ejeotment offered to allow plaintiff to remove the goods. Subsequently plaintiff's wife said she wanted to pack up, and was going to leave, and defendant detained the goods. Hia Worship considered that defendant had aoted wrongfully, though under a conaiderable degree of irritation. Plaintiff had been inconvenienced by the illegal aotion of defendant, and was entitled to damages. Judgment for £5 and coats.
CHRISTCHURCH.
Star (Christchurch), Issue 4861, 28 November 1883, Page 3
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.
Log in