HORSES STUNG
BEEKEEPER’S APPEAL FAILS. COURT UPHOLDS DECISION OF MAGISTRATE. CHRISTCHURCH, October 2. A judgment of important c t*> aoiarists throughout Now Zealand was dei\cred at Timaru yesterday by Mr ■Justice Adams. His Honour dismissed an appeal by Leonard Freddies. Robins, an apiarist from the decision of the .Magistrate. Mr C. R. Orr Walker. in awarding damages on tbe gro.'iul of negligente, to AVi ham Frederick Kennedy and Charles Co’umb for injuries and loss suffered by them through their horses and themselves being siting by appellant's bees. '['lie appeal was heard at the last qnarter y session of the Supreme Court in Timarii. In his judgmnt his Honour stated that in his opinion the true ground of an notion lor damages for inju: it's inilicted bv bees was negligent e, and he thought the Magistrate’s decision was right. He thought however, it was at least doubtful whether bees could be placed in the category of dangerous animals.
TMF FACTS REVIEWED. Reviewing the facts; his Honour stated t.lir.t, Robins kept, about 70 hives containing some millions ol bees, on a sinal. area, near the boundary of Kennedy's farm. On February 2otb. when Kennedy and Colunib were reaping a crop of oats close to the apiary the bees in great numbers attacked Kennedy’s horses, stinging them si severely that two died and another was injured. Roll) men were incapacitated lor several days. ( olumb and Kennedy brought an action tor damages alleging negligence, by lL.lvns by bis keeping bees in unroasonab.e numbers, in an uureasonab'e place, and with appreciable danger to the inhabitants of and to other persons luwfidiv on the adjoining farm, and that Robins knew the „ bees were of a dangerous and mischievous nature and accustomed to sting peop.e and domestic animals.
The apnel'ant contended that as his apiary was registered under tlm Apipries Act, he was legally authorised to carry o nbusiness, and to keep bees for that purpose, and was not therefore, under any duty to prevent injury or damage to his neighbours.
LAWS GOVERNING REE-KEEI’ING His Honour stated that the Apiarie* Act, 1C0(3, was the first statute passed in this country to regulate the bee industry. The long title til the Act was “An Ad to encourage and protect the bee industry in New Zealand ’ and this title also appeared in the Act passed in the following year, but was omitted on the Consolidation Act oi 1(108, and did not. appear in the present Act. In ail these Acts, however, the object p’ainly was to improve the yield and quality of the honey and t-) encourage the industry by raising the quality and so increasing the demand and this object was attained by the strict observance of the condition imposed. The Act. however, was not per missive but restrictive. The Magistrate had found that Robins was guilty oi negligence, and also held that, apart from negligence, the liability of a bee-keeper was coextensive with the liability of a person keeping oidiis land water, wild, and dangerous animals or poisonous fumes. GUILTY OF NEGLIGENCE.. Mis Honour expressed the opinion, in the circumstances that Robins was guilty of negligence in keeping so many hives cn the boundary of Kennedy’s land, and that this negligence was the effective cause of injury and damage, ft was therefore, unnecessary to deteimine whether there was 1 ab.liv in such cases without proof of negligence. It was interesting to note that the American authors to which lie had had access coshlered that there was no liability apart from negligence.
In dismissing the appeal his Honour stated he accepted the authority of O’Gorman v. O’Gorman, concerning which ‘‘Beveil on Negligence” staterl ‘‘Bees kept in unreasonable numbers, and at an unreasonable place, and with appreciable dager to a neighbour, having done damage, were held to affect their owner with liability.”
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HOG19311005.2.10
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Hokitika Guardian, 5 October 1931, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
633HORSES STUNG Hokitika Guardian, 5 October 1931, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
The Greymouth Evening Star Co Ltd is the copyright owner for the Hokitika Guardian. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of the Greymouth Evening Star Co Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.