APPEAL COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 17, 14 July 1911, Page 5

APPEAL COURT.

MASSEY v. NEW ZEALAND TIMES. . By Telegraph—Press Assoeiatiem. Wellington, Thursday. In the Appeal Court, in the case Masscy v. New Zealand Times, Mr. - Solomon said that the evidence of what _. was sitid in debate in the House was ' part of (lie surrounding circumstances, and therefore admissable. Even if >tha evidence was not admissable, appellant had not proved that its admission bad done him injustice. The question of libel or no libel was pre-eminently on«-\,„, for the jury, and their verdict could not be set aside unless there was no < possible ground upon which they could come to the conclusion they did. ', Decision was reserved. SAMSON v. AITCHEs6n.

Wellington, Last Night. ' • The Court sat to ln-ar the appeal case Samson v. Ailehcson, an appeal from the judgment of Sir Joshua Williams. Tho facts are: The appellant Samson was th« owner of a motor-car and was liegotiating for its sale to a widdw, but htfd arrived at no final agreement for its sale. The intending purchaser and he-r son wished for a trial before purchasing. A trial was arranged, and while the son was driving the car, respondent (plaintiff in the court below), who was riding a bicycle, was run over and injured. Evidence was given in the court below (though denied by the appellant) that the appellant, who was in the car, gave the son instructions in the management of the car. In Uic Supreme Court the judge directed the jury that appellant was liable if the jury found that the driver (th« son) was negligent. The ' jury found a. verdict of negligence and assessed damages at 1i750. On this verdict, Samson moved for judgment on | the grounds that upon the evidence hn was entitled to judgment. He also moved for a new trial on the ground* that the judge misdirected the jury. This motion was dismissed Sir Joshua Williams, and from this decision the present appeal was brought. , Messrs. Adams and Hay, of Thwedin, appeared •for appellant, and Mr. Chap-' man. K.C., and Mr. Hanlon for the respondent.