SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1780, 19 June 1913, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

SHIPPING CASE OF INTEREST. FRUIT NOT LOADED. Legal argument was heard yesterday in an action, which commenced in the Supreme Court in December last, before the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) and a common jury of twelve. The, litigation aroso on account of tho fact that a quantity of fruit had not been loaded at Rarotonga on a certain voyage of the Maitai from San Francisco to Wellington. The plaintiffs in the action aro Carl lvohn, trader, of Rarotonga, and a number of Now Zealand produce merchants, for whom Kohn ships fruit. The defendants are tho Union Steam Ship Company, Ltd., owners of the Maitai. Mr. C. B. Morison, K.C., with him Mr. A. Fair, appeared for Kolin and the other plaintiffs; Sir John Findlav, K.C., with him Mr. P. Levi, appeared for the Union Steam Ship Company. When tho caso was before the Court in December last it appeared from tho statement of claim that Kohn .trades jn fruit and other produce and exports fruit from Rarotonga to various merchants in New Zealand. On February 21, 1912, Kohn (it was alleged) delivered to the Union Steam Ship Company fruit for conveyance from Rarotonga to ports in New Zealand. This delivery was made within reasonable time before tho time fixed for the commencement of the voyage, viz., February 22, 1912. Tho Union Steam Ship Company (it was alleged) failed to load certain, of the fruit and failed to elleet delivery within a reasonable time after February 22. By reason of this failure, Kohn and the other plaintiffs had suffered damage amounting to .£1022 and they sued to recover this amount. As an alternative causa of action, Kohn and the other plaintiffs alleged that tho Union Steam Ship Company had contracted to carry the fruit by the Maitai, and had issued shipping notes in respect of this contract. The steamer, because of her unseaworthiness (it was alleged) failed to keep her time-table and was unable to fulfil the terms of the contract. '"Defendants generally denied liability and maintained that the loading of tho fruit depended 011 their being able to keep tho terms of tho mail contract. IJiev also maintained that they had mado all reasonable efforts to load tho fruit in face of adverse weather. It agreed that the only question to be submitted to tho jury should be that of the amount of <lamsge_ suffered by the plaintiffs, and after evidence for the plaintiffs had been called addresses were delivered on this point. The jury, afior n. retirement of half an hour, tound that the allowance in respect of the damaged fruit should be Is. Gd. per case, or a total of .4830 11?. Evidenco was subsequently called 011 the other questions involved in the action, and it was 011 these questions that legal argument took place yesterday. His Honour intimated that ne would take time to consider his decision.

. NELSON WILL CASE. In Chambers yesterday, before his Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout), argument was heard 011 an application lor costs by one J. A. Ahlstrom, executor and residuary legatee of the will of one Thompson, of Nelson, who died 111 April last. , .. . . The facts, shortly stated, V'ere that 111 January last Mrs. Mary Thompson, a widow, made her last will and testament, appointing the above-named applicant sole legatee and exeeutor of her will. On ■thia will being presented for probate a caveat was lodged on behalf of an adopted daughter, who was, under a former will, a legatee, tho Public Trustee being appointed executor. Tho matter came beforo his Honour at Nelson, when evidence was taken in support of the caveat. One ground of objection was that the .testatrix at the time she mado the last will was not of sufficient mental capacityfo fully appreciate the fact that she was dealing with her whole estate. A settlement was arrived at, tho present applicant withdrawing his application for probate, the question of his costs being paid out or tne estate to be reserved and argued m \\ ellington. , . This is the question which came before his Honour yesterday. Sir John Findlay appeared for the Public Trustee, and Mr. Maginnity, of Nelson, for the applicant. After hearing counsel, his Honour reserved judgment. ' ■