WELLINGTON SUPREME COURT.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10010, 5 April 1910, Page 5

WELLINGTON SUPREME COURT.

A WAIRARAPa CASE. At the Wellington Supreme Court, yesterday, before Mia Honour, the Chief Justice, reserved decision in the case Riddiford v. Forman was given. In this case the question raised was whether the defendant, as occupier of sections 220 and 224 and of part of 216 in the Wairarapa North County, had a way , over sections 182, 183 and parts of 216 and 218, which belong to the plaintiff. The defendant had used a way for some years ovar these last-named sections, but it was admitted that unless he could show he had a way of necessity over plaintiff's land he could not clajm the way he had so used, it waß contended that if there was now way of necessity still a way of necessity was created after 1881. His Honor gave it as his opinion that defendant's contention as to a way of necessity having been created had tailed. There was no implied grant of a way of necessity over sections 182, 183 and 180, as it was not proved that there was not access to the Crown land unsold that bordered on sections 180 to 190 when those sections were granted, and which unsold land included sections 220 and 224. When the transfer to the Crown of part of section 216 was made it had as one of ics boundaries a public road, and was consequenly not landlocked. "1 may add,'' his Hononur continued, that the defendant has no doubt been placed in an unenviable position, but the court cannot help him. The cise shows the need of not disposing of Crown lands until proper access is given to them, and also the need of carefully seeing that no rights to take roads be allowed to lapse unless it is clearly seen that these rights might not be exercised. An injunction restraining defendant trom using the way would have to be made perpetual. Plaintiff was awarded costs. Mr C. P.' Skerrett, K.C.. with him Mr H. H. Ostler, appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Myers for the defendant,