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

COURT OF APPEAL

JUDGMENTS DELIVERED [Per United Press Association,] - ' l ' WELLINGTON, June 18., The Court of Appeal has delivered judgment in the following cases : , In the case of the Amalgamated, Society of Railway Servants v. the At-torney-General the court held that the word “ rent ” in the National Expenditure Adjustment Act must be construed.-' as . having its popular rather than its technical meaning. The Chief Justice held that part; 111 of the Act relating to the reduction of rent applied to the rental chafed railway’ employees occupying railway homes. The appeal was accordingly allowed; 1 * Finlayson v. Minister of the Public Works.—This case involved the question of whether, betterment could be deducted from a claim for compensation under the Public Works Act. The court held that in view of the indefinite abandonment of the construction of the railway track at ■ Dargaville no claim for betterment was justified, and jud"« ment was given in favour of the claimant, Mrs Finlayson. In the case Blenkiron v. the West-port-Stockton Coal Company, which had been remitted from the Arbitration Court for-the purpose of obtaining authoritative decision as to the meaning of “ average ’ weekly earnings,” in section 6 of, the_ Workers’* Compensation Act, the Chief Justice and Judges Herdman, Blair,_ and Kennedy delivered separate judgments.Each arrived at substantially the same conclusion—napiely, that for the purposes of assessing: compensation the average weekly earnings were to he ascertained by dividing- the amount earned during a relevant period' by the number of : days in a’ : normal working week. The Chief Justice stressed the viewtKat section 6 was peculiar to the New Zealand Act, and- hence that decisions on the point* in issue in England were irrelevant. * The defendant company admitted liability for £660, but as a result of the decision of the court it has now been held liable .for - the maximum compensation of £I,OOO, costs to be determined by the Court' of Arbitration. ■

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD19340618.2.127

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Evening Star, Issue 21749, 18 June 1934, Page 12

Word count
Tapeke kupu
315

COURT OF APPEAL Evening Star, Issue 21749, 18 June 1934, Page 12

COURT OF APPEAL Evening Star, Issue 21749, 18 June 1934, Page 12

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