TECHNICAL OVERSIGHT

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 8, Issue 47, 9 February 1945, Page 5

TECHNICAL OVERSIGHT

UNUSUAL POINT OF LAW

COURT ACTION HELD OVEft

On the grounds that service of the information had been ! carried out in a manner not compatible with the law governing incorporated companies, Mr Auckland Counsel in a defended J. PI am us v Adams succeeded in having litigation held up for one month when the case came up for hearing in the Whaka. tane Court last Tuesday. Shortly after the case was Mr Alexander signified his intention of objecting on the grounds of irregular service. Defendants he dec3ar r ed, were in this case an incorporate company and by law notification or intention to institute legal proceedings must be served at the companies registered office, or to the president ehairman ;> managing director or secretary or other person purporting to be acting for the company. The company's registered office was at Wellington yet the Auckland office. had been served with the information on plaintiff's behalf. Harold C. L. Auckland manager of the gave evidence that Adams Bruce registered head office, was in Majoribanks Street } Wellington. The Magistrate: Mr Barry } are yea prepared to admit this. Mr Barry, who defended said that! he had no other course. It was strange that as the opposing, had had no notice of tiie>technical defence which was being, raised. The Magistrate: I am afraid I can't help that. I am prepared to acceptthe. evidence to allow you to lodge a fresh case.