COURT OF APPEAL.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 559, 14 July 1909, Page 4

COURT OF APPEAL.

t CISBORNE LAND TRANSACTIONS. (( ' ,4i_ii- ". "" , WHO WAS COUNSEL FOR MAORIS? > t- He&rmg of tho fcaso of William Douglas I , Lysnar, solicitor,* of, Cisbomo, versos Ahe- ( j* . sat* To M»iroß4id was resumed | in the Court of Appeal yesterday morning before tkor Honours Mr. Justice Williams f 1 (Actkg-CWof Justice), Mr. Justice'.Pennis- . ' ton, and Mr. Justice Chapman. , ■ !i 4ir. L. T. Burnard, of Gisborno, appeared for the appellant, and Mr. T. W. Hislop for the respondents , , . , , Tho appeal was against a decision or Mr Justice Edwards, given at Gisborno a few i r months ago, -The respondent,-To Maiio, was i the' ownor of an interest in the Nukutauna ; and Moutcre No 1 Blocks of Native land, Hi the Gisborno district, part of the land subject to the Eass Coast Nativo Lands Trust, ' Tho respondent, Rihara, was administrator i and legatee of the estate of Tamihana Wai- ( 1 tatakma, deceased, who had been, also tho ( t owner of an interest in theso blocks Tho res'' epondents 'sued tho appellant m the Supreme i ' Court, claiming an injunction to restrain hint i from appearing before the Validation Court, J and acting as their solicitor in connection ' with these blocks of land ° Mr. Hislop, in addressing tho Court, sub- ' i . imitted that appellant had appeared before tho [ l Validation Court at Gisborno on February 17, ( 1909, for the pnrposo of blocking the applit cation.. The circumstances,under which he \ i appeared .rendered the Judgo unablo to say 1 who was appearing for tho Natives Mr f Nolan, who had appeared for tho Commw- ? sioner. wanted to Know at tho January sitt ting (when appellant was not present) who i | ' was the proper solicitor for tho Natives, so ( t' that they could treat with him regarding tho_ < ,' payment of monoys. ' ' , f Sir. Justice Denniston suggested that the ( > Judgo had taken tho view that until Mr, ( ', , Finn had properly complied with too rules ho , 5 was not entitled to appear t i" Mr. Hislop said that on August 20, 1908, i I „both Mr. Finn and Mr. Lysnar claimed te ] f 'appear for the Natives ' ( Mr. Justice Williams- Why did not Mr. \ Finn move to have Mr. Lysnar'a name re- , \ , moved, and have his own substituted ? _ | ; i .Mr. Hislop I submit that there is no ne- , i ? cessity to remove a person's name from tho ] record. ,As a matter of fact, there is no ne- ( f cesstty to have a retainer filed at all. Mr- Justice Chapman* Assuming that a lien existed, the only Court whioh could adradicate would be tho Validation Court? i Mr. Hislop: Yes. r Mr. Justice Denniston said that the case i should have remained with the Validation Court. The question of lion had never been ( 1 ' tried.- — ■ * , " . I ', Mr. Justice Williams. If ho believes ho has » lien, there is no wrong m claiming ltP Mr. Hislop) Yes, but if ho claims a lien i ' ' which we can show he did not have, and I which be ought to have known he did not l have— i ' \ ' ' ' i Mr. Justice Williams? don't allege I fraud. " i ,' > ( Mr. Histep i We allege that he had no lien, ■ ' , and that he ought te have known he had no ( lien, v ' Mr Justice Donniston asked why, if deceit i or fraud was alleged against tho appellant '( Lysnar, such a charge bad not been made in !, the declaration? , i 1 'Mr, Hislop submitted that the circura- f i' stances, aa'found by tho Judge in the Court below, would establish a charge practically of i fraud on the appellant, bat it was not necesf sary to go so iar. Ho submitted that tho ' appellant carelessly represented something to ' be a fact which \ was not a fact, and the ', means were easily within his reach of asceri taming that it was not a fact Then he took 1 upon himself the risk of the consequences of making such a representation A man was actionable'for acting oarelossly. ilf one~em- ' ployod counsel appear for one m-~«ny | Court and another person came in knowing. I that'he had no Tight to appear, hadHtne no remedy ? ' '*■ , Mr. Justico Denniston* I have never heard [ of a case, in which a Judge has allowed fraud I to be proved where' it was not alleged. I f cannot conceive that a Judge would give a f judgment in that way, and 1 am quite snro I "■ Mr. Justice Edwards did not, or would not, do t so There is no suggestion that Mr. Lysnar , " did not believe ho had a lien. [ Mr. Justice Williams. Will you show us j ' the grounds on which he must have known f' that he had no hen and that his retainer was j revoked ?i , , ► -'Mr. Hislop went into the accounts, and } stated at length the methods for payment of f r costs The Court heard the conclusion of arguV ment and reserved its decision. NATIVE APPELLATE COURT- ) THE APPOINTMENT OF SUCCESSORS. f Their Honours -Justices Jones and Rawson 1 presided at a sitting of the Native Appellate ' Court hold in Wellington yesterday. , An application was made bj J Mr Opham (of i Messrs Bell, Gully, 8011, and Myers), under \ ' Section 24 of the Maori Land Laws AmondJ, ment Act, 1903, to amend an order of tho I Native Appelhto Court appointing successors { to Ngahuka Tungia, deceased, by including f 'certain other Natives alleged to bo entitled I to inclusion in tho order. ! Mr. A" L. D. Fraser opposed tho aprilicaf toon'on behalf of,Raiha Puaha, one ot tho ( present successors, and Mr J J M'Grath ' also opposed it in the interests of tho re--5 \ maining owners. > -. The land involved comprises 24 acres near [ Porirua township. , ' i ' , After hearing argument as to its junsdic- ' \, tion to amend tho order, and as to tho claimants' rights to be included, the Court reserved its decision. . ! ,