SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1631, 24 December 1912, Page 4

SUPREME COURT.

(Before hi 9 Honour Sir Robert Stout, C.J.) decision re oil bore rights. IN SPECIAL CASE. Reserved judgment in a. special case relating to oil-boring rights was delivered in the Supreme Court yesterday by tno Chief Justice (Sir Hob-art Stout). ike case had been stated to settle'certain perliminary points arising in connection with a claim tor specific performance of an ■agreement, or, in the alternative damages for alleged breach of contract. lie plaintiff was Linda Elizabeth Hadley, married woman, of Auckland, and the deiendancs were the British ISmpiro Petroleum Co., Ltd. , At the hearing Mr. M.. Myers appeared for Mrs Hadley, while bir John imdlaj, K a, with Mr. D. M. Hndlay, appeared for the Uritisk Empire Petroleum Co., Ifawttapttiß fd^^tant frank Baker and others. ,°u erant was registered at Ivew 11} mourn against such of the lauds as were umfci (ho Deeds llceistration Act, v.liuo a caioai ™s« afainst the title oXsugh oUter lands concerned as weru under til' e Transfer Act. In respeot ot some ot ilie lands of both classes, the cntcd mortgages prior to J«b» • IJ " b > the mortgagees were ink paitie.j U ine died of grant', nor had they consented iO it AnoUier pW was this: SMnt to the lodging of the caveat reicrieJ £>, a le-i'e of part of the lands was ginnted to William Hwclc for a term ornvej< rights protected by tiio caveat. • . m « inio That was tho position on Apnl 18, IJ3-, solicitor (claiming to act as trustee or the British "Bin pi re Petvoie uin ; to disnose of her rights to tno Empire Petroleum' Co., later the company adopted taio agreement. v social deed.' It then appeared that &e of the deed of IMB not rans°nted to the agreement, ot Apra lb, 1912, nor had they im<rertakento ob.nin CO.! Ltd., declined to yerlorni P«rt .ood till; to the boring rights.. They sho was not entitled to assign in .cum, ot tli* nn-eemeut ol April Ifc, l-'i-i, anu " 3 another ground they referred to the> rnoi'ca"cs and the lease. Howevei, not: requisitioned ior the discliaig'.' 0 ■ mortgages or for the consent of the moiu"Ogees. lfcnc'j several interesting <1 c.v fions of law aross. Thsso wore snbniit ed to the.'Court, in special form, and ley»J argument took place over a neck j a o. f . ' Yesterdav his Honcur aitswerwl tue miestions in favour of tho British fcmpiro Petroleum Co., holding that the company had good ground for rescinding the a ß rto mcut.

THE TEMPTATION. HIS KOXOUB ASKS "WHY?" A. middle-aged man, named Charles Kennedy, who had pl&a<l-ocl guilty a„ Utm hcim to a charge of theft fem a dwell™, was brought before the Chief Justice (fair Kotert Stout) for sentence in the Supreme Court yesterday.morning. Mr. H. H. Ostler, of the Crav,-a'J^y,^Uti)ce, v apiKarod lor tlia Crown. '. . v''-';■,';''■;•■' . Ashed if he had anything to fay as to why sentence of the .Court should not I* passed. Kennedy, v.-!: 6 was not ix-presantal bv counsel, .■.('.•jclarcil that .since ho hist came out of ffflol; he had bten wor.cmg hard and lehdmg'a good, honest, due. "How .conws it, ibciwthat you.are Ixtelc demanded his Honour: / The prisoner replied that it wasthe result of a sudden temptation, fhcwior he'Tiiflionour remarked that he supposed that the temptation was the result ol 'l'rom the police report, it appeared that the prisoner Kid been convicted on a number of previous occasions-once for breaking and entering at Dunedyn, when a sentence of 12 months' reformative treatment had teen imposed. His Honour warned the prisoner that he was going the right way to qualify as a habitual criminal. A .sentence of 12 months' imprisonment with hard loooui was invnosed, to be followed by 12 months detention for reformative treatment.