LAW REPORTS

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2648, 20 December 1915, Page 9

LAW REPORTS

SUPREME COURT PRISONER SENTENCED His Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stou.t) presided at a sitting of the Supreme Court on Saturday, when there appeared for sontence a young married man, Allan Otto Harold Catherall, who had. pleaded guilty to a charge of attempting to defraud, in that on November 15, at Nelson, ho sold a dray and set of harness which were part of tho chattels covered by an instrument given by way of security. Mr. A. Dunn, who appeared on behalf of accused, said that Catherall was 22 years of nge, and !iu<! only been married for three months. Hitherto he had borne an exemplary charaoter, and tho wrong was done more from thoughtlessness and ignorance than from any intention to defraud. Accused was prepared to refund the .£0 obtained for the goods and pay the costs of the prosecution. Counsel asked that accused should he ordered to come up for sentence when called upon. His Honour admitted Catherall to probation for six months, and ordered him to refund the amount of .£9 and pay M 3s. costs of proseoution within three months. ■ \ , A RESERVED JUDGMENT. Reserved judgment has been delivered by His Honour Mr. Justice Chapman in an appeal from the decision of the Magistrate's Court in the case of Edith May Hannah v. Herbert C. Brice, restaurantkeeper. t It appeared that on removing from Miss Hannah's premises in Lanibton Quay the defendant (Brice) had 1 removed a range valued at .£54, and Miss Hannah claimed the return of this or its value. Mr. L. G. Reid,,y>'.M., decided in August last that the range was wrongfully removed, and he gave judgment for the plaintiff (Miss Hannah) for the return of the range or for payment of tho sum of .£35. Against this decision the defendant (Brice) appealed last week to the Supreme Court. Mr. E. P. Bunny appeared for the appellant, while Mr. A. W. Blair appeared for the respondent. - The appeal was dismissed with .£8 Bs. costs, His Honour holding that the range . was not a tenant's fixture, but part and parcel of the premises. ( SUIT AGAINST THE CORPORATION. In the Supreme Court on Saturday His Honour Mr. Justico Hosking completed the hearing of evidence in the civil action, Richardson, M'Cabe and Co. v. the Wellington City Corporation, a claim for over ,£4OOO for alleged breach of contract in connection with tho supply of motor buses. Mr. C. P. Skerrett, K.C., with him Mr. T. Young, appeared for the plaintiffs, while Mr. A. Gray, K.C., with him the Sity Solicitor (Mr. J. O'Shea appeared for the defendant corporation. Shortly before 6 p.m. the case was adjourned to a date to be fixed for legal argument. DISLOYAL UTTERANCES. His Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout), at tho Supreme Court on. Saturday declined to make an order for a rule nisi to,quash the conviction of the young man Francis Peter Hagen, who was on Thursday last fined ,£25 for disloyal utterances. The application was made by Mr. E. G.. Jellicoe. ARBITRATION COURT :• RESERVED JUDGMENTS. Reserved 1 judgment'has been delivered by the Court of Arbitration in the compensation case of Raymond Allan v. the Union Steam Ship Company, heard recently in .Wellington. In tho course of the judgment, the President .of the Court (His Honour Mr. Justice StVinger) stated that the Court was not satisfied upon theevidence that the plaintiff's eye had been injured to the extent required to bring it within the decision; Grace v. Auckland Gas Company, Ltd., in which it was admitted that plaintiff's eye had been injured to such on extent 1 as to render it useless in respect of his ability to earn wages. The Court thought, therefore, that the proper course would be to make a suspensory award of one penny per week, to be computed from the date of the judgment and to be continued until the same was ended or increased in accordance with the provisions of the Act, and if later on the plaintiff could satisfy the Court that his eye had become. useless to the extent required to.bring tho injury within tho terms of the second schedule to the Act, or, failing that, that his earning capacity had been diminished as a, result of tho injury, a fresh application could be made to the Court. The Court awarded him for medical expenses (if not already paid) and .£5 ss. costs, with witnesses' expenses and disbursements to be fixed by the Clerk of Awards. A similar order was made in the case of Wm. Mallard v. tho Union Steam Ship Compan}', whioh stood on tho same footing as the previous case. At the hearing Mr. P. J. O'Regan appeared for plaintiffs, and Mr. P. Levi for the defendant company. The Court has also its judgment in the case in which Louisa Janie Haaell, fourteen years of age, a 1 minor, by her guardian ad litim, Ivor Hazell, claimed damages from Stanley Burgess, ■ fruiterer, as the result of tho loss by plaintiff of her right eye consequent upon an accident sustained, while in defen- . dant's employ. On April 28, while removing portion of a covering of a, case, plaintiff was struck in the right eye by a splinter, and ultimately the l4 eye had to sbo removed v from the socket. Compensation was therefore claimed for the loss of 'tho eye 1 in accordance with the second ' echedulo of the Workers' Compensation Act, as amended by tlie Act of 1911. Judgment was for the plaintiff for tho amount fixed by tho Act, and to be arranged by the parties, or, failing that, a further application to bo made to the Court. Plaintiff was also awarded =67 7s. costs, with witnesses''expenses and disbursements to be fixed! by 'the Clerk of Awards. Mr. P. J. O'Regan appeared at the hearing for plaintiff, and Mr.' T. Noa,vo ; foi- defendant.