ABATTOIR CHARGES.

Hokitika Guardian, 28 September 1923, Page 4

ABATTOIR CHARGES.

A REFtJXD CLAIMED. ATCKLAN'D. Sept. 2G. Mr Justice Merdmnn to-day reserved his decision in ;i Supreme Court test notion in which 1!. and \\ . Ifelhiby, Ltd., sought a refund from the City Council of moneys allegedly wrongly charged against plaintiffs in respect to abattoir fees. The statement of claim set forth that under Section 27 of the Slaughtering anil Inspection Act. 1908. plaintiffs. the holders of a meat export slaughterhouse license, were entitled to sell, within the area controlled by the mimic ipal abattoirs, stock .slaughtered by tin-ill upon payment of fees fixed by lie. City Council, such lees to be not less (han those charged for the use of llie municipal abattoirs exclusive of the cost o! .slaughtering. The section provided. further, il'mi all amonnis received by the council in relation to iis abattoirs from all sources should not lie greater than a sum suificient to defray the annual eost of the abattoirs, inclusive of a sum cpual to b per cent, on the cost of the abattoir. I’l'iiniifls aldged that the council had wrongfully charged against the annua! eost oi the abattoirs items in respect of depreciation, sinking fund and preliminary expenses, and had exceeded the limit under Section 27. The period concerned was 1918 to [922. Plaintiffs claimed Cb.'ibb 3s lid up to the year

ended March 31st. 1921. and also claimed £2600 18s 9d in respect of fees on stork slaughtered hv them and sold out--ide the municipal area. For the defence it was contended that the second proviso of .Section 27 had no implication to the present case. Even if the proviso did have application, the remetlv was confined to appeal to the Minister of Agriculture. Further, if defendants were bound to repay the amounts claimed, such repayment should he pro lata to all persons who had contributed, and not only to meat export people. The defendant council admitted that so far as fees paid in outside districts related to whole carcases, the council had no legal right to retain the same. Mr Skerrett. and Mr Toylc appeared for Ilellahys and Mr Johnstone and Mr Cocker for the Citv Council.

Evidence and legal argument occupied a day and a-halt.