COURT OF APPEAL

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 177, 16 April 1918, Page 8

COURT OF APPEAL

4 SALE OF NEW ZEALAND WINE.

The questions whether New Zealand wjiie may be sold in quantities of two gallons or. upwards without a license, or Tviielher the exemptions contained iu the Licensing Act, liRiS, enabling this .to bo done had been irapliedly repealed by later legislation, were involved 111 11 enso which occupied the attention of the Court oi Appeal yesterday. The Bench comprised the Chief Justice, Sir Kobert Stout, and Their Honours Hγ. Justice Edwards, Mr. Justice Cooper, Mr. Juslice Chapman, and Mr. Justice Sim. There wero two .ippnals which, lor tho purposo of legal argument, were treated as one: Arthur Benjamin Crawford (ajiniilliiut) v. Henry Nuttnl (respondent); I'-rtclerick Chajlis (appellant) v. Henry iNiittal (respondent). Air. li. D. Bumlord, of Auckland, appeared for the appellant in each .ase, and Sir. J. \V. .Saliiuind, K.C, for the respondent. The I'r.cts of the case were that 111 September last the appellant, Crawford, was charged before n Stipendiary Mugi.v tralo at Haweni with several breaches of thn Licensing Act, and the appellant, Chiillis, was charged with having assisted in the commission o£ the offences. A coiivjction was recorded in each case. Crawford was the holder of ti license permitting him lo fell New Zealandwine in Auckland, under the name of J. Wendel and Co., mid Challis w.as his traveller. TJio charges arose out of three orders for who which were taken by Challis, as a traveller, at Hawera, the olfence, as staled, being that of sclhnjf wine at a place -(.her than the company's licensed premises at Auckland. Jl'r. Bainford contended that no sale

took place at Hawera. Tho transaction wae a mere transmission of an order. In point of law 'ho ealo took plnco at Auckland, and tho question whether it took pli\ce 011 Crawford's licensed premises or not did not corao within the scopo of the case. After hearing legal argument the Court reserved its decision, MOTORISTS AT LAW. Hearing wna concluded yesterday in the Court of Appeal in a case on appeal arising out of a collision between two automobiles at Dnrgaville. Tho appellant was S. .Colmore-Williams, for whom Mr. A. K. Blair appeared, and tho respondent, John Weir, was represented by Mr. H. D. Bamford, of Auckland. Tho case v>;as argued before the Chief Justice, Sir Robert Stout, and Their Honours Mr. Justice Chapman and J'dr. Justice Sim.

In a verbal decision the Court gave judgment for the respondent, with costs.