S.M. COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXIII, Issue 249, 22 October 1901, Page 2

S.M. COURT.

Monday, October 21.—8-fora Mr R. B L, Stanford, S.M. :- / r r Sash and Door Company v. E. E, " Fromont.—Judgment for plaintiff for [. £& 2s Bd, and costs Bs. • DEFENDRD OASES. CLMM-FOK COMMISSION. , J. M. T&ignett (Waitara) v, Sere geant. - This was a claim for .£35 com- , e mission on sale of land. ( ; Evidence was by the plaintiff e and W. Baker (Waitara) in suppoit of the claim. 1 For the defencp, evidence was givsn . by Mrs J. F. Mirsh, the purchasftr, < 3 Mn G. \V. Barfovd, and Mr O, B. [ 5 Lever. : 1 The case was then adjourned to i j allow defendant's evidence to b(> take a Bt Onehungo, where he now reside-'. ] Mr Kerr for plaintiff, Mr Roy for do- ] e fendant. i S DISPUTED LIABILITY FOE BATES. , 3 Olifton County Counc'l v. Wickbnm ] Flower (London), This was a c-.1-ira " 1 for .£7l 5s in respect of rates on'the | j property at Mokau, known as Molcu ] j Jones' estate, , Mr Roy appeared for the Countil, f and Mr Kerr for the defendant. ( - • The questions involved wore~(:i) £ f Was the Council bound to accept n—- ' tices given as to sub-leaees under so- [ 5 tion 52 of the Rating Act, 1894, or did it rest at its discretion not to mnke . 3 the change on tbe rate roll ? (b) Did | i the defendant come under the defini- 8 fc tion of "occupier" of native tav.ls c j! under the Act ? ■. For the defence it was contended c that with regard to a number of tbo 5 sections they were sublet to tenant.-', ( i and therefore defendant was not liaWln • for rates in respect of such holdings. t ; Mr Vaughan, County clerk, gave f formal evidence in support of the • claim. f J For the defence, the evidence of Mr t ; Travers, taken at Wellington, was put ; His Worship, after Mr Kerr's argu- c '■ ment on defendant's behalf, and with- c | out calling on counsnl for the plaintiiF, a ; gave judgment for tho amount claimed v on both points, with costs .£9 5s 3d. i Mr Kerr gave notice of appeal.