COUNTY COUNCIL ACCOUNTS

Taranaki Daily News, 26 June 1922, Page 5

COUNTY COUNCIL ACCOUNTS

INGLEWOOD v. TARANAKI. THE JUDGE’S DECISION. The reserved decision of Mr. Justice Reed in the Inglewood and Taranaki County Councils’ ease, heard at last sessions of the Supreme Court in New Plymouth, has been delivered. The dase concerned a motion on behalf of the Inglewood County Council applying to have the award of the Controller and AuditorGeneral set aside, principally on the ground of his failure to apportion the reserves vested in the Taranaki County specially as a means of providing revenue for the maintenance of the Junction Road within the county. The award made an apportionment of the revenue from the reserve, and the applicant county submitted that the freehold of the reserves should be apportioned so that the Inglewood County would have full control of the reserves within its boundary for the upkeep of that portion of the Junction Road which lies within the area of the newly-formed county.

The judgment says: “This, is a motion to set aside an award made by the Controller and Auditor-General under section 15 of the Counties Act, 1908. Seven grounds were alleged in support of the motion, and it was sought to add an eighth at the bearing. It was stated at the bar that without any admission of informality or irregularity the Controller and Auditor-General was agreeable, with the consent of the parties, to make certain alterations in the award. This resulted in three of the grounds being withdrawn, two were subsequently abandoned, leaving for consideration two of those stated in the original motion and a further suggested one. A preliminary objection was taken that the application had been made too late and ought to be refused on that ground. The award was published on December 23, 1921. The present proceedings to set it aside were commenced on May 1. An interval elapsed therefore in commencing the proceedings of over four months and a week.”

His Honour then cited the law applicable to. the time in which proceedings to set aside an award must be commenced. and said: “Where there is delay, as in the present ease, of over four months and a week, the onus is upon the applicant of satisfying the court that there is some adequate reason for the delay. The explanation given is that the ordinary legal holidays immediately followed on the publication of the award, and that it would have been inconvenient to hurry the matter on for the February sessions at New Plymouth. Assuming that the law offices did not open after the holidays till January 9, there was ample time to have considered the position and to have filed the motion before the commencement of the February sessions, which were fixed for the 14th of that month. As a matter of fact the applicants passed no resolution to take steps to set the award aside until March 22. It is urged that defendant council has not been prejudiced by the delay. This is denied, but in my opinion it is not essential to determine whether it has been prejudiced or not. The law requires a motion of this sort to be made with reasonable promptitude, and unless there is some adequate reason for the delay, such delay is fatal to the application. I think that there has been an unreasonable delay in this case, and that upon that ground the motion should be dismissed.

“The motion will 'be dismissed with costs to the Taranaki County Council ten .guineas and disbursements, and to the Controller and Auditor-General ten guineas and disbursements.”