SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1717, 7 April 1913, Page 9

SUPREME COURT.

THE HOARDINGS IN THE CITY. BY-LAW UPHELD. In the Supreme Court on Saturday morning Mr. Justico Chapman delivered judgment in the recent caso concerning the license Zees chargod for city hoardings. The caso arose out o[ a motion to quash a city by-law. The ■ action was commenced under tho By-laws Act, 1910, Lawrenco Goodwin Porter, advertising "ngent, luoying to quash Section 79 of the Wellington City By-law No. 1, 1008, which imposes a license fee on hoardings used for posting bills. The grounds of the motion were: That tho licenso fee is grossly unreasonable and excessive. Mr. It. F. von. Haast appeared at tho hearing in support of the motion, which was opposed by tlio City Solicitor (Mr. J. O'Sheii;. , ■ ■ • Tub point at issue-was whether the-fee should be merely a registration i'eo, as Air. yon Haast contendou, or whether tho council lias power to restrict hoardings by imposing a I'eo iii tho nature of - a tax, as contended by Mr. O'Shea. Tho applicant in his affidavit, by way of supporting his contention that tho fed is unreasonaolo, stated that ho .is an advertising agent, and that he owns 21 hoardings in Wellington, varying in size from las to 1020 square feet. The license fee demanded thus runs up to »C 5, and in the whole amount to Xb'l 103. This, he says, amounts to 30, per cent, of the net income he derives from advertisements on hoardings. Tho Town Clerk and City Engineer of Wellington made an affidavit, in which they said that it Aas the practice of all .civic-authorities to discourage as far as possible tho construction ■ and use of Hoardings, and if only a nominal license feo were charged, hoardings would be orccted all over tho city, They say that all the hoardings in the city arc dirty and unsightly, and no care is taken to keep them in a state of decency. They say that paper is pasted on until it is half an inch thick, and this becomes detached in largo pieces, and carried about the~ streets. They speak of paper Dying about and littering the streets, after rain has wetted tho paste, and of horses being frightened and drains blocked. They say that hoardings are erected as temporary structures, that it is difficult to get owners to make them safe, and add that if a- uniform email, fee were charged proprietors would er,ect them of too great a size. • TJie applicant replied, stating that this cjepreciatory description does not apply to hoardings owned by him. . - _ "The argument for the applicant," said his Honour; "is that the council' has lid right to impose a tax yielding substantial revenue, but only such as will fully cover the cost of inspection and supervision. It is manifest that if its power is so limited the uniform fee of. 10s. upon all hoardings used for advertising suggested by Mr. von Haast would suffice." After stating tho law on this point, His Honour said: "I can seo no objection to a borough council raising revenue by means of licenso fees where, it is authorised to exact them. As to the other question," his Honour continued, "I do not think that this Court can ; dictate to a borough council how it is to frame a by-law which is intended to be either wholly or partially prohibitory. The council might in ono by-laiv wholly prohibit suoli advertising and in another relax the prohibition. It might surely do this by means of two clauses in tho same by-law. I do not Teo why' it should do the same thing in tho manner in . which this''council purports to have done it Tho application failed, and the. motion was dismissed, with .£6 63. costs and disbursements. I CONTRACT TO LEASE. .THE COURT'S INTERPRETATION. Mr. Justice Chapman delivered decision in the case of Henderson t. .Gurr, in which questions arising out of tho construction of a contract to 1 leaso premises wore submitted to tho Court. _ The action was in tho form of an originating summons issued for tho purpose of obtaining an interpretation of tho contract. The plaintiff was Matthew Henderson, sawmiller, of Onehunpa, and tho defendant was Norman Leslie Gurr, land agent, of Dannovirke. '. vAt the' hearing Mr.-T. H. G. Lloyd,, of Dannovirke, appeared for Mr. Henderson, while Mr. C. P. Skerrett, K.C., with him Mr. R. Kennedy, appeared for Mr. Gurr. ' It appears that a contract had been entered into by tho parties for tho leaso of certain premises in Main Street, Dannevirke, and the question had sivce arisen as to whether Honderson or Gurr was liable for rates, _ taxes, and insurance. Hence the following questions were submitted to tho Court:— / Is the relationship between the parties constituted by. the contract for lease with a compulsory purchasing clause that of landlord and ten- . ant or that of vendor and purchaser P; If the relationship of landlord and tenant is created do the words, "at a rental of .£3 10s. per week clear of rates, taxes, anil insurance" mean that the landlord is to nay them all for tho term or that tho tenant is liable? . If- tho relationship of vendor and '• purchaser is created, on whom does tho lability fall? If it falls on the tenant or purchaser, . from what date , should it be ; - portioned ? . His Honour decided that the document in question constituted tho parties lessor and lessee until either by effluxion of t,imo or by the defendant exercising his option to purchase, they changed that relationship to that of vendor and purchaser. As a tenant defendant beeamo liable for rates. Each party had an insurable interest, and could insure if ho wished.' The reference to taxes could have no effect as that was regulated by Statute; Tho term commenced on June 7, 1911, from which date the tenant was liable for the rates His Honour interpreted tho 'sentence me ? n ' n ?, : "I will pay a rental of £J 10s.: clear. : The costs wcro allowed, save witnesses' expenses. HOTELKEEPER'S APPEAL LOST. YOUTHS AND LIQUOR. Mr. Justice Chapman gave judgment in tho caso of an appeal from tho decision of' Mr. S. E, M'Cai tliy, S.M., in a licensing case which was heard in the. Lower Court last year at Danneviirkc. The appellant was Henry Bakpr, licensee of tho Club Hotc-I, Dannovirke, ■ and tho respondent was John Potter. At the hearing, Mr. T. H. G. Lloyd, of Dannovirke, appeared for tho appellant (Baker), whilp Mr. P. S. K. Macassey, of the Crown' Law Office, .appeared for tho respondent. In the Lower Court, Baker was convicted of allowing a youth, named Charles Russell, apparently under the ago of 21, to bo supplied w'i'tli liquor, on July 3, 1912, for consumption 011 the premises. Tho magistrate's finding on the evidence was that Mrs. Baker, wife of the licensee, supplied the liquor, which' wns consumed in a private parlour in the hotel. When the licensee saw Russell and two other youth's, who wore also there, he at once ordered them off tho premises. Tho mag-

istrato imposed a line of J;">, and costs 13s. j/'iom this decision Baker appealed, on thu ground tlmt it was erroneous in law. His Honour dismissed the appeal, and decided thai the conviction entered by the iimgistrulo must bo affirmed, Cos I s XlO 10s. were allowed against the appellant. UPPER HUTT CASE. INJUNCTION REMOVED. Recently a motion to remove an injunction was brought in the Supremo Court before the Chief Justico (.Sir Robert Stout). It had to do with the legal troubles of tho Upper Hutt Town llall Company, Ltd. It appears that on January 22 last tho shareholders of the company held a meeting at which certain resolutions purported to bo carried reducing thp number of directors from seven to six, and effecting the reduction by the removal of Mr. A. J. M'Cnrdy from the directorate. These resolutions it was proposed to confirm at a meeting on February 10, but before that date Angus John Jt'Curdy and others obtained nil interim injunction on an ex parto application, restraining tho company from holding such a meeting. Tho injunction was granted on the ground of certain irregularities in tho notice calling the meeting, tlio refusal to allow a poll to .be taken at the meeting, and tho refusal to transfer shares in order to enable certain persons to attend tho meeting as shareholders. In the actions for the injunction the directors nf tliu Hall Company, Jas. Gorrie and others, were joined as defendants. They now moved to obtain the removal of tW injunction. At the hearing, Mr. R. Kennedy, instructed by Mr. J. S. Barton, appeared in support of tho motion, which was 'opposed" by Mr. A. W. Blair, oil behalf of the plaintiffs. His Houout held that there had not been irregularity as alleged, and tliat M'Ourdy nad not made the demand for the poll at the proper time, and that even if he had done so it could not havo been granted him because he demanded it in the right/ of certain proxies, and a, proxy could not demand a poll; His Honouv also-held that the directors were justified in desiring to consider the 'transfor before granting tliem. 110 dissolved the injunction. He reserved the question of any damages which defendant may have incurred through the granting of tho interim injunction. DIVORCE ASKED FOR. WANGANUI PETITION. In tho Supreme Court his H.ononr tho Chief Justice heard the petition, of Mary Alice Sorley, of Wanganui, for a divorce from Dr. John Sorley. Tho petition was made on grounds alleging drunkenness and cruelty. Mr. A. Fair appeared for the petitioner, but the respondent did not appear and was not represented.' Mrs. Sorley stated that she was married to Dr. Sorky in 1888, and that they lived together at Wangnnui until 1890, after which they lived at leilding' until 1899'. i. Sho noticed his drinking habits soon, after they were married. He continued to drink (with one or two intervals) right up to the time of their separation in 1908. Since 1908 he had not kept her. 'Ho had at times been cruel to her, . George A. Lethbridge, farmer, Ilunterville, a brother of tlio petitioner, corroborated his sister's evidence. A decree nisi wns granted, to be made absolute in three months. ,