LAW REPORTS

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2642, 13 December 1915, Page 9

LAW REPORTS

SUPREME COURT APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS BOARD StIED BY APPLICANT An important question concerning the appointment of teachers was raised in a case heard before His Honour Mr. Justice Chapman in the Supremo Court on Saturday morning. The parties wero Mrs. Kate Ann Howard, of Blenheim, plaintiff, and the Marlborough Education Board, 'defendant. Mr'. M. Myers appeared for the plaintiff, while Mr. G. G. AVatson appeared for tho defendant board. , It was set out that the plaintiff (Mrs. Howard) held a D 1 certificate, and had applied for the position of headmistress of Koromiko School. Among the other applicants wero Miss Gayno, who held a C 3 certificate, and Miss Williams, who hold aD2 certificate. As aDI certili-' cato was invariably recognised as superior to tho certificates held by tho other two applicants mentioned, tho senior inspector' reported that Mrs. Howard was thp only applicant fitted for tho' position ! or, alternately, the candidate best httea for the position. Under tho Education Act, 1914, it was the duty of tho board, and not the school committee, to determine as to tho technical qualifications of the applicants, tho committee only having a say in the selection when, tho qualifications were nearly equal. In tho present case, tho board sent forward tho names and qualifications of three'teachers, recommending tho appointment of Mrs. Howard. In spite of this fact, the Koromiko School Committee had' selected- Miss Gayne. The plaintiff (Mrs. Howard) now sought a writ of mandamus, compelling the defendant board to appoint her as headmistress of the Koromiko School. Mr. Myers explained that while Mrs. Howard was nominally the plaintiff in the ease, tho matter had been taken up 1 by the New Zealand Educational Institute, of which both Mrs. Howard and Miss Gayne were members. After hearing legal argument, His Honour said that, as it was important that the appointment should be made before the end of the month, he would givo his decision forthwith. He would make the following order: "That the board forthwith send the scho.ol committee the' qualifications' of Mrs. Howard, togother with the names of the other applicants, and generally proceed under tlio provisions of Section 71, • Sub-sec-tion 6, and of paragraph (a) of Section 72, Sub-section 2, of the statute, and that the meeting for tho purpose of making tho appointmont be held before the end of December. The question of costs was reserved. Y.M.C.A. TRUST BOARD. THE RIGHT TO BORROW. His Hoiiour Mr. Justice Hosking gavo hiYreserved decision on Saturday in tho case of the Y.M.C.A. Trust Board v. The Sinking Fund Commissioners and tlie Attorney-General, an' summons brought to determine the question as to' whether tho plaintiff bojjrd has power to borrow tho sum of £5000 on the security of its property in Willis Street to repay a loan of £5000 to the National Mortgage Company. At the hearing, Mr. R. Kennedy appeared for the Y.M.C.A. .Trust Board, tho City Solicitor (Mr. J. O'Shea) for tho Commissioners, and the; Solicitor-Gen-eral (Mr. J. W. Salmond) K.C.) for the Attorney-General. His Honour was of opinion that there was no reason why the Trust Board 6hould not be authorised to effect a now mortgage to pay off that which now threatened it. If it was- desired on this basis to obtain authority for the board to re-borrow, whether the, property was subject to a charitable trust or not, it would (His Honour thought) be necessary to institute separate proceedings .by action, to which the Y.M.C.A. was a party. Ho • was also of '.opinion that the proceedings should not be instituted in the matter of the Trustee Act. The form of tho question put in the summons must be amended, so as to restrict'it. For this reason, and to afford an opportunity of discussiug the course by aniendmcnt or otherwise which the parties might desire to adopt formal judgment would bo deferred.