INSURANCE CLAIM DISPUTED

Hokitika Guardian, 27 September 1930, Page 3

INSURANCE CLAIM DISPUTED

DESTRUCTION OF HOTEL

AUCKLAND, September 24

Fire that razed a iiotel and adjoining buildings in the King Country township of Ow.hango last November gave rise to a claim for £I2OO which came * before Mr .Justice Reed. Plaintiffs were Arthur Parrish, builder, and James Hen.rv Mahoney, milk vendor, and the defendants were the Homo Insurance Co., Ltd. Mr Upham, of Christchurch, appeared for defendants.

Two policies, one for £IOOO and the other for £2OO, were produced by plaintiffs in support of the claim. Both policies were arranged with the defendant company, a branch of an American concern with attorneys in Christchurch and Auckland.

Insurance companies wore not desirous of sheltering behind technicalities of clauses in their policies, said Mr Upham, in opening the case for defendants. Counsel made reference to rhe attitude of the companies in the event of arson.

Opposing counsel objected, to this, as it might he construed into a suggestion that bljo Owhango fire was a case of arson Unless defendants were prepared to establish arson it should not he mentioned.

His Honor said lie had rn decide on the legal position. Mr Upham: Insurance companies a* a rule would rather pay than be forced into defending an action.

His Honor: From what I know o F them during my experience at the bar, some of them would fight anything.

When the Court resumed after lunch it was announced that the parties had agreed on a settlement.