MUNICIPAL LITIGATION.

Waikato Times, Volume 108, Issue 18139, 2 October 1930, Page 3

MUNICIPAL LITIGATION.

CHRISTCHURCH DISPUTE. CATHEDRAL SQUARE LEASE. CITY CORPORATION’S APPEAL. (By Tclegrapn.—Press Assn.) WELLINGTON, Wednesday. A further stage of the now wellknown Christchurch‘Cathedral Square case came before the Court of Appeal to-day in the appeal of the Christchurch City Corporation from the judgment of His Honour, Mr Justice Herdman delivered in this case in May of last year. In March, 1929, the At-torney-General, on the relation of Mr George Gould, of Christchurch, merchant, issued at writ against the Christchurch Corporation claiming injunctions to 'compel the council to remove the existing tramway shelter and buildings situated in Cathedral Square and prevent the council from proceeding with the erection on the square of a building which was to . comprise a shelter, public lavatories, and other conveniences. The matter came on for hearing in the following May, when Mr Justice Ilerdman held that the land on which the present shelter stood and the one on which the proposed building was to be erected was vested in the City Council for the use of the inhabitants of the city of Christchurch as a public reserve only, and consequently the council was not entitled to place erections thereon. Judgment accordingly was entered in favour of the AttorneyGeneral, with conditions that the conjunctions were not to be issued without a further order of the court. Tt was, hoped the litigants would be able to settle the dispute between them, but they were unable to do so, and in July last the Corporation obtained leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal from the whole of Mr Justice Herdman’s judgment. - It Is is this appeal which is now being heard. N On the Bench are the Chief Justice (Sir A. A. Myers)'" and Justices Blair, Smith and Kennedy. Counsel for the appellants are Messrs J. O’Shea, A. T. Donnelly and Loughman, and for the respondents, Messrs M. J. Gresson and D. E. Wanklyn.

Case for the Appellants. In opening the case for appellants, Mr O’Sea produced two plans, one made in 1868 and the other in 1879, which he contended showed that the whole of Cathedral Square other than that part occupied by the Cathedral itself was a street. These plans nan only recently been discovered in the Lands Office at Wellington. He urged that as the whole question was one of a publio nature and interest any evidence relevant to issue should be admitted, even though it was not produced in the court below. Mr Gresson said that while he did not want to prevent any evidence bearing on the issue from being produced he nevertheless, thought that Hi plans showed have been submitted to Mr freeman, respondents' expet for examination, though he realist that in the circumstances that woul nave been very difficult. The Court provisionally admitU the plans, reserving leave to Mr Gref son to argue the quest.on of their arl missabi}ity at a later date. Questions to 3e Answered.

Continuing, Mr O’Sea said the cas required the answer-.of the Court i two questions—(l) Was the land i the west to the western boundary i the Cathedral site a street? (2) If were a street-had the Chiistchur Council power to erect the propose buildings on it, or retain the buil. ings at present there? The latter poi was not raised in the Court be.o\ The council contended, said Mr O’She that everything outside the s te of t. Cathedral was a street, including .11 portion known as the Godley Block. The Court then proceeded to e imine the numerous plans submit!, n evidence in the Court below, at. perused various statutory enactment nalerial to the past history of tln Square. At this stage the Court adjourned ill Friday morning.