SUPREME COURT.

Wellington Independent, Volume XIX, Issue 2076, 18 June 1864, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

civil sittings.--spectal jttet. Thuksday, and Fbiday 16th and 17th Jukb (Before His Honor Mr Justice Johnston.) . M'Lackjan and Anotheb v I. B. Feather SION, SUPERINTENDENT. This was on action brought bj the plaintiffs to recover the sum of £1465, alleged to be due to them for loss of time caused by alterations and additions to the original plan, and by reason of vessels coming alongside the wharf obstructing the work during con- ; struction, and for mitigation of the penalty of £5 per day, inflicted for the non-comple-tion of contract, within the time agreed upon in the specifications, and which excess of time beyond the day fixed in the specification, the plaintiffs alleged was caused by the defendant's own act. : .r The trial lasted two days, and created oonsiderable interest. . ,- ; ; The jury after a consultation of an hour, returned a verdict for the plaintiffs, damages £345, and a balance of account £1 15s 4d. GELL V. THE SUPERINTENDENT. This case which was the first of two special jury cases on the list for this day, and whion had beenpostponed from the sittings in March. last, in consequence of the sudden call of Mr Justice Johnston to Auckland, came on for hearing, when Mr Brandon, for the defendant, in pursuance of the leave, of the Judge, on application made the day before, moved* on affidavit, to postpone the case, wcih was an action by the plaintiff, .thet.conr;: tractor for building the Suprem^eCpi^;-and\ Offices, against the defendantifdr: adages;^.,; sustained by the negUgenceitms^es;^aid|; ! -j0 : alleged incompetency ; of . \Mr^O.;*B;?,Oa(^g^i ; : who prepared., the plans vaij^v spe,o^^aj|j.pj|B::fsj-^V for the buildings. JJ£r Brandon ,'f^p^q|3(()ni}s;t||i the ground/tha^^^ witness, and being injJ3ngUn^j;|i|i^,dff^^^|i^&|| was .; entitled. |to; ,ja^rcQtti^|i6&|&|^^^^»i

application the day before the trial, simils applications having been, twice before mad and refused. The Judge required an afi davit in reply, which was made, and in ac ditiontothe tacts above started, itwas allegei that the plaintiff would be deprived, in a probability of the testimony of many of hi witnesses, if a delay of nine months were ir curred, at* the workmen perpetually chanf ing their quarters were not likely to remai in Wellington till that date. The case its postponed till after the second case o McLaggan v. the Superintendent was hearc and in the end the Judge allowed the com mission to issue upon payment of all cost! and expreised an opinion that itwas a grea hardship to the plaintiff.