Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Monday, 26th January, 1903.—Before Mr R. L. Stanford, B.M. THE WOEKMBN'S LIEU ACT. T. Brown and another v. August Frank and another. Mr F. Wilson (Rjy and Wilson) appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr Quillbm (Govettand Q li'liam) for the N.P. S>sh and Dx>r Oompany, who were juned with the defendant, who held a contract from th-m. Mr Wilson called

John Skinner, engineer, who stated that on November 21flt the value of work done by Frank was about j£4o. Frank threw up the contract. It «ould cost £3B 2s 61 mire than if Frauk had completed his contract. The £4O h»d bean paid by the Sash and Door Compiny to Frank at the time when Frank throw up the contract. An argument arose as to the amount the Company should have held bick, and Mr Quilliam held it was hid down in the Act that it shou'd ba a fourth of the contract price. His Worship said tha'. it was agreed that providing there was oo notice of attachment from the workmen the contractor could pay out three-fourths of the money, regaining one-fourth on the completion of the contract'. Mr Quilliam said at the time Frank threw the contract; up the Sash and Djor Company had no liability in the matter.

Mr Wilson said that it was absurd '0 argue tint workmen- had a remedy r.n the completion of the contr-ic'; but not in the beginning if a contractor threw the contract up. His Worship said under the law the employer as well as the workman was protec ed, and in this case itstemed that the employer should be protec'ed, us tbe Company would be called upon to pay twice if judgment went against them, Had tne workmen taken the precaution to send in their notice the Company would have bean placed in a different posi i id. He would dismiss the Sash and Door Company from the claim. His Worship gave judgment against Frank with costs - X2 9s. WOMAN WANDERING AT LARGE. A middle-agei? womao, named Jane Mullin, was charged wi'h bang found wandering at large without visible means of support. Sergeant Haddrell stated the woman had arrived herefrom Auckland last Thursday, and since then she had been' wandering about tbe town and sleeping cut at night. Since Saturday the woman had been under arre3t, but the polica could not say if she was of unsound mind or suffering from the tffecta of a prolonged drinking bou*. He asked for a remand for a wetk in .order that the woman could be placed under medical observation. His Worship rumaoded the woman for a week for rxiedical treatment.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19030127.2.7

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXV, Issue 22, 27 January 1903, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
440

MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXV, Issue 22, 27 January 1903, Page 2

MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXV, Issue 22, 27 January 1903, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert