KARORI STREAM

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 71, 25 March 1933, Page 14

KARORI STREAM

SEPTIC TANK CASE

ACTION AGAINST CITY

RIGHTS OF THE PUBLIC

The hearing of the Karori septic tank case was continued at the Supreme Court today.

Mr. Justice Ostler was on the Bench,

Application was made to t>« Court by John Allan Kirkealdie, farmer, Karori, for an injunction against the Wellington City Corporation to restrain the Corporation from allowing the South Karori Stream to be polluted by the effluent from the tank. The plaintiff claimed compensation for the alleged pollution of the stream..

Mr. B. K. Kirkcaldie appeared for the plaintiff, and the City Council was represented by Mr. J. O'Shea, City Solicitor, and Mr. J. Lockie, Assistant City Solicitor.

Most of the evidence had been taken at previous sittings of the Court. On the Court resuming today, ' his Honour said he understood that it was agreed by the parties at the last sitting of the Court that he was to give a finding on the facts, and that the questions of law should be referred to the Court of Appeal at its present sittings, v He had given a finding on the facts. He now understood that Mr. O'Shea did not want to go on with the agreement which had been made. He 'would like to know what attitude counsel for the plaintiff intended to take. Mr. Kirkcaldie said he desired to accept the direction of the Court, but he would like the case to be dealt with at the present sittings of the Court of Appeal; otherwise, it would be better that the Judge who heard the evidence should conclude the hearing of the case. His Honour: I understand by the agreement that I was to givS a judgment on the facts. Mr. O'Shea: This is a very important matter to the City Council, as there is an expenditure of £20,000 at stake. His Honour: I realise that. Mr. O'Shea: There maybe some of the statements made in the statement of facts drawn up which involve a question of law. His Honour: 13 that bo? A public nuisance is a nuisance which interferes with the rights of his Majesty's subjects have rights of access either to follow that unless his Majesty's subjects have rights of access either to the tank or to the stream, an important point is involved—a public right. Some discussion followed in regard to the possibility of there being time to prepare the case and print it for the Court of Appeal. Mr. O'Shea said he was under a misconception as to- what was involved in the agreement come to at the previous sitting of the Court.

It was then agreed that the hearing of the case should proceed in the ordinary way.

Evidence was given as to road access to the septic tank and the stream.

The Court adjourned until a date to be subsequently fixed by his Honour, when addresses of counsel will be heard. :