SUPREME COURT

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 2955, 19 December 1916, Page 9

SUPREME COURT

A NELSON CASE.

In the Supreme Court yesterday Mr. Ju6tico Chapman heard an originating summons concerning tho estate of tho lato Thomas Cawthron, of Nelson. His Honour was asked to make an order on the following questions:— 1. Whether the executors should pay out of the estate the sum of £5350 to tho Nelson City Council as tho estimated cost of erecting a bridge over the Maitai Eirer, in Trafalgar Street, in accordance with a plan prepared by the City Engineer, at tho request of the deceased, in pursuance of a verbal promise by him to provide the cost of tho bridge. 2. Whether the executors should pay tho sum of £5000 to the jSTolson City Council as tho cost of forming and completing the Queen's Drivo, upon Britannia Heights, in accordanco with. a scheme devised by the City Engineer at tho request of the deceased. Sir John Eindlay, K.C., with him Mr. D. R.. Hoggard, represented the Nelson Comity Council, and the Wainui County Council; Mr. W. V. Rout, of Nelson, appeared for tho executors of the will; and-Mr. P. g. K. Macassey for tho Attorney-General. The, "Attor-ney-GeneraT was a party, because Mr. Cawthron left the residue of his estate for the founding of a technical school. Decision was reserved. EX-POLICEMAN GAOLED. Albert Edward Potter, formerly a Solice constable, was sentenced by Mr. ustico Chapman to eight months' imprisonment on a charge of breaking, entering, and theft, at Hawera, whero he was employed at the time as a night -watchman. -A TRADE ■MARK MATTER. In the Supreme Court yesterdayj before Mr. Justice Edwards, an application was made by Mr. Myers on behalf of the Tootal Broadhurst Lee Company, Limited, for judgment in an action Drought by thai company against Messrs. Veiich and Allan. The action was one in which the plaintiffs, who aro British manufacturers, and who manufacture a material or fabric known as "Tobralco," claimed an injunction to restrain the defendants from infringing tho plaintiffs' trade mark "Tobralco," and from passing any goods not of the plaintiffs' manufacture as and for goods of the plaintiffs' manufacture, and in particular ironi selling, offering for. sale, or disposing of as "Tobralco" any article which is not of the plaintiffs' manufacture. Mr. Myers stated that the defendants had agreed to submit to an injunction, and to pay the plaintiffs' cost as between solicitor and clientj the plaintiffs waiving any claim to damages. Mr. Peacock, who appeared for the defendants, said that the plaintiffs were entitled to judgment, and he consented to its being entered in accordance with the terms agreed upon, but he desired, to say that the salesman who had sold other matorial as "Tobralco" had done so in contravention of the linn's express instructions. J'udgmont was entered in the terms agreed upon.