COURT OF APPEAL.

Waikato Times, Volume 108, Issue 18158, 24 October 1930, Page 8

COURT OF APPEAL.

A BREWER’S LICENSE. MINISTER’S POWER LIMITED. JUDGMENT DELIVERED. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Friday. The Court of Appeal delivered judgment in the case Jorgensen v. the Minister of Customs. The Chief Justice held that although the questions raised in the originating- -summons could not be answered categorically the legal position could be summed up in the following answers: (1) The Minister had not under the Licence Act of 1915 an absolute -right to refuse to grant a brewer’s licence. (2) If an application for a brewer’s licence were made for a brewery and plant erected in accordance with the statutory requirements, and not erected in a no-licence area, the Minister must grant his approval, unless he refused on the ground that applicant was not of good character and reputation and therefore unfitted to hold a licence. (3) The Minister had not unfettered discretion to refuse an application for a brewer’s license, for his powers were limited, as set out in the Act itself. (4) Where the Minister, under the Finance Act of 1917, refuses his approval' to issue a new licence on the ground of the character of the applicant, such applicant has Ihe right of appeal, as contained in the Act.

No order was made as to costs.

Knud Christian Jorgensen, of Auckland, merchant-, represents a syndicate known as the New Zealand Pilsener Syndicate, which was formed for the purpose of. establishing in New Zealand a brewery for the manufacture of light Pilsener ale, and is desirous of obtaining a brewer’s licence under section 28 of the Finance Act, 1915. On March 11 the-syndicate made application to the Customs Department for a brewer’s licence in respect of premises proposed to be erected at Opaheke, such premises not being situate within or within five miles of the boundary of a licence district. The comptroller of Customs replied that the Minister regretted that he was not able to approve the application.

CATHEDRAL SQUARE CASE. . COUNCIL’S APPEAL DISMISSED. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Friday. The Court of Appeal delivered judgment to-day in the case of the Christchurch City Council v. the AttorneyGeneral regarding Cathedral Square. The appeal was dismissed. His Honour Mr Justice Blair, in delivering the judgment, said that it appeared to the Court that the evidence in the case fell far short of establishing that that portion of Cathedral Square reserve material to the case was ever used as a highway, or had ever become a public road or street. The Court was of opinion that appellant’s case failed on the facts. Section 171 of the Municipal Corporations Act could only have been invoked by the appellant corporation if it had established that the land to be covered by the proposed new buildings was for a period of 20 years prior to January 1, 1901, maintained and controlled as a public highway, and this it had failed to do. No order was made as to costs, as leave to appeal was granted to the appellant corporation only on condition that it should pay respondent’s costs.

This was an appeal by the Christchurch City Corporation from the judgment of Mr Justice Herdman, delivered in May of last year, refusing the council permission to erect -tramway shelters, etc. *