CLAIM FAILS
SHOP NOT A MILK BAR. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) CHRISTCHURCH, Aug. 5. Holding that no member of the defendant’s staff was substantially employed as an attendant and/or dispenser in a milk bar, the magistrate, Mr F. F. Reid, gave decision for defendant in a reserved judgment on a claim by the inspector of awards for three penalties from Andrew A. Holland, confectioner and fruiterer, for the employment of a female worker as a bar attendant in a milk bar.
The magistrate said that defendant’s real business was that of a confectioner and fruiterer. Although there was one electric milk-shake machine in the shop there were, however, no tables, chairs, or stools for customers. The sale of milk shakes was only a trifling part of defendant’s business, and the worker in question did not spend more than
40 minutes in a working week in dispensing milk shakes. Plaintiff claimed that this was sufficient to make the shop a milk bar, but this view was not upheld by the magistrate.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAITA19380806.2.13
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Wairarapa Times-Age, 6 August 1938, Page 3
Word count
Tapeke kupu
169CLAIM FAILS Wairarapa Times-Age, 6 August 1938, Page 3
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Wairarapa Times-Age. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in