Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

A DEAD MARE

INTERESTING LEGAL POIN TS Last year, in fciie month of Xovomber, in;ut> belonging to Messrs. Percy Bros., farmers, of To Ore Ore, Wairarapa, was, as the result of a collision with a motor oycle, lolled, on the To Ore Oro Road. Before the removal of the carcass of the animal the mail ooach from Masterton to Oastlepoint, owned hy Messrs. Fly and Young, of Masterton, came along tho road, and tho coaoli horses shiea at the body of tho. dead! animal, with the result that the. coaoli was capsized and 1 smashed, tho harness broken and one of tho horses killed. Legal proceedings wore taken by Messrs. Fly and Young against Messrs. Percy Bros, in the Masterton Supreme Court mid a verdict for £154 damagjs was obtained. .Against this . judgment -whioh' '-was given by Mr. Justice Chapman, Percy Bros, appealed, and tho hearing of the appeal came before the .First Division of the Appeal Court yesterday. Tho Bench was occupied by the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout), Mr. .Justioo Edwards, Mr. Justice Cooper, and Mr. Justice Sim. Mr. C. P. Skorretfc, K. 0., with him Mt. Jordan, of Masterton, appeared for the appellants, and Mr. 11. Kennedy, with him Mr. Boilings of Masterton, for tho respondents. Mr. iSkeirett, after, giving details of tho accident and contending that the carcass of the animal was removed as soon as possible, pointed out That at the time of tho accident the nwro was not in tho actual possession" of the .appellants, but was in process of being returned from a. .neighbouring farm. The real question 'involved was as to whether a person not in possession of a chattel, which, through no (fault of his, oreates a nuisance, can be held to be liable for tho conscqiiences of that) nnisanca merely becauso.ho is tlie possessor of that chattel. He contended there could be no liability for constructive possession or the right to possession. The hearing of argument in the case occupicd the whole of the diay, and at 4 p.m. the Court adjourned until 10.30 .a.m. to-day. ■

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19160927.2.55.2

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 2887, 27 September 1916, Page 9

Word count
Tapeke kupu
346

A DEAD MARE Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 2887, 27 September 1916, Page 9

A DEAD MARE Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 2887, 27 September 1916, Page 9

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert