CLEAVE v. KING.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1846, 22 January 1880, Page 3

CLEAVE v. KING.

The following report cf the proceedings in the Court of Appeal at Wellington, last week, in the case Eing, appellant, v. Cleave, respondent, is supplied by the "New Zealander": —This was a motion for leave to appeal to the Privy Council to reverse a decision of the Court of Appeal awarding enhanced damages to tho amount of £1363 to the respondent Cleave in respect of an action previously decided in the Supreme Court at Ohristchuroh. Mr Gully for the appellant, and Mr Izard for the respondent. Mr Gully, in his argument in support of tho motion, contended that execution should De stayed in respect of the verdict of tho Court of Appeal, and that the appellant should Bimply bo called upon to pay the amount into Court pending the decision of the appeal before the Privy Council. Mr Izard did not oppose the application so far as the appeal waß concerned, but contended that the application with respect to the amount of the verdict, was one to vary what had been for a long time the practice of the Court. His learned friend had shown no reason whatever why tho ordinary practice should be depatted from in this instance, and the appeal should only be granted on the usual terms, which did not admit of the money being paid into tho Court, for, by the adoption of that course, the defendant would be deprived of interest. Let the execution take its course, and the respondent would give a bond for the restitution of the amount Bhould the appeal go againßt him. Justice Richmond—lf they deposit the money in Court should they not only deposit the amount of the verdiot, but a sum to cover interest. Mr Gully was quite prepared to do tbat. They were prepared to deposit any amount the Registrar might think sufficient, the Chief Justice intimated that leave to appeal would of course be granted, but the question as to terms would be reserved.