LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 849, 22 June 1910, Page 11

LAW REPORTS.

6 . CLAIM THE PARAPARA ORE DEPOSITS.. CHAMBKRS PROCEEDINGS. Further reforeneo. was luade .yesterday, in Chambers before the Chief Justice (Sir Robert iStoiit). to a claim for £•19,500 arising out of. certain negotiations for working tho Parapara iron ore deposits and other ore and coal-' bearing country. In this case tho plaintiff is Joseph Howard AVitheford, lat-o M.H.R., i;f Auckland, How visiting England. The- defendants are the- Public Trustee, at Wellington, as executor of thpwill of the late Sir A. J. Cadman, deceased, Daniel ,Berry, ironmonger, New Plymouth, Allan Maguiro, contractor, Wellington, and Hamilton Gilmer, gbhtlcinaii, Wellington'. . Messrs. M. Myers and P.. Levi appeared for.plaintiff, Mr. E.,Stafford for .the' Public Trustee, and Mr. ]?. G. Dalziell for the other defendants. ''■ The object of tlie proceedings was to obtain leave to-have questions of law arising from tlie pleadings stated .and decided before, the case begins. Plaintiff proposed to submit'an amended statement of claim to. overcome certain objce.tions raised by defendants. -... 'Mr.-Stafford mentioned that he had only received the proposed amendments, 'and as matters stood ho was not ;in a position to 'determino at once what attitude to take. He'required- time to consider. ' .-.-■,. ''.Jit. Myers remarked that there, was an enormous, amount, of correspondence and tho full amendments had not'yet, been run off. They were.-only indicated. Mr. Dalzielt urged that it was impossible to go on with; the statement of claim as amended. There we're ,vari-. oils letter:!, documents,.etc., under the. hand of the late A. J.. Cadman', and it would bo necessary, for plaintiff, to particularise the letters so that defendahto could understand.what was; being relied on.'. It. was necessary that defendants should know what the written contract was that plaintiff relied on. : . _,' ■' '. Mr. Myers.contended tliat plaintiffs wore not. bound to set out the written documents on which they wcro relying. If they did so the pleadings would bo interminable. ~ ••-:■.-.. After further : argument .it was decided, that tho matter:■ should bo adjourned until a convenient date,' probably some time 'during the sitting of the Court of Appeal,'for; tho piirposoof enabling defendants ■to -determine what attitude they will talco upoiv.the amended, statement of, claim the question of law. . The...statement' of defence which has been filed in answer to the, statementof claim (published in Tjie Dominion law reports June 18) urges :t- . (1) That there, never was any contract because of its uncertainty as to the subject matter to bo dealt with.. ~ (2) That it infringes the law of: perpetuities insomuch .'as no limit of time is. put upon tho exercise of the option, of purchase given to the plaintiff.;.. ... (3) That, the'contract was a contract relating to . the disposal of land; and was not in writing,; and is\ therefore tininforceable under tho Statute- of Frauds.. ' • : : .:' (4) That the plaintiff ..never carried the contract into effect, .:and is, therefore', not entitled to be remunerated.,- -, (5) .The.'defendants, contend that the statement. of claim discloses no causo of action against them. ':■• (6), That -before anything was-done under the contract Sir A... Jr Cadman, one of the alleged contracting .parties, died, and that put an end to the, contract. No new contract, it...is urged,, -was entered into after his death, binding the. defendants. (7) That, if there was any such con 1 tract, it .does not':bind the Public Trustee' and. is. ultra vires in respect, to him;. ,' .'■' ... (8) That,'if Trustee'is-not-bound (the contract, being a joint;'con.tract), the- other defendants, "are hot bound, by any such new.contract... CATHOLIC CHURCH LANDS. in HA^yKE , s bay. , ;,: ■ s Action is being taken by tho Rohian Catholic Church authorities in Hawk'e's, Ray to have, a Rill introduced into Parliament this'session giving power,to deal with certain lauds m -Napier and Wairoa, which have been 'found,urisuit. ablo for/,tliQ purpose of - erecting churches and schools. The authorities wish to sell the.lands'in question, and. buy other sites with the proceeds. .A Bill to that end will be introduced in tho House; As a preliminary step it is necessary for the Supremo Court to certify ;that the objects of the proposed Bill cannot' bo obtained without such a measure. Tho matter .was beforo Mr. Justice Edwards at Napier recently, and was referred to .-Wellington:, ■ - .. ' An application was mado by Mr 1 . J: J./ .Devine in Cliainbers yesterday'. to hear the evidence" • of' witnesses from Hawke's Bay in. support of- tho -purposes,of the 8i11...''.' ■■■ The Chief Justice decided to boar evidence on Thursday, Juno-30. SHAMROCK HOTEL LEASE. ■ JUDGMENT DELIVERED. ■ Judgment was delivered yesterday by the Chief Justico (Sir Robert Stout) in the case relating to tho lease of, tho Shamrock Hotel, Molesworth Street, in ivhicb. argument was heard'by his Honour last Thursday. The plaintiffs were J. Staples and Company; Limited,, brewers, of Wellington, and Anton Martin Schweigaard \Nannestad, hotelkeeper, of Wellington, Michael Joseph Hodgins, hotelkecper, of Lower Hutt, and; Thomas Hodgins, farmer, of. .Tane, near. Pahiatua, the trustees under the will of Thomas Hodgins, hotelkecper, Mr. C. P. Skerrett, K.C., 'appealed, for Staples and Company, Mr.'.A..L. Herdman' for Namiostad, and Mr. AV. H. I). Bell for the defendants. > The case was concerned with a lease, dated March 4, 1890, given by .Thomas Hodgins (now deceased) to Staples and Company, and with aiu under-lease, dated July'l9, 1907, given by Staples and Company to . Nanncstad, both leases referring .to-the Shamrock Hotel/ It was pointed out that t)io trustees, who appeared as defendants to tho action, .had refused to consent to an assignment of the under-lease by Nan'nestad to a fourth party. The Court was ashed to consider three questions: (1) Whether, it Was. necessary for Nanncstad to obtain the consent of the trustees, to an assignment of the underleases; (2) whether it was. necessary for Staples and Company, to obtain tho consent of the trustees to an assignment of the underlease by Nnnucstad. before they, themselves could legally consent to the assignment ; and (3) whether, in consenting to an assignment by .Nanncstad, without tho consent or concurrence of the trustees. Stnu'cs and Company were committing iv breach of a covenant not to assign."■underlet, or part with possession of tho land and premises leased to them. ■ His Honour decided that tho answer la all .the questions must be: in , tho iifTftlive. and the plnintiffs were not entitled to costs, as'tho .summons wan lin their interest. ,