ACTION FOR DAMAGES.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2379, 21 December 1908, Page 6

ACTION FOR DAMAGES.

DISTRIBUTING COY. V. THE KING. VERDICT FOR PLAINTIFF. [Press Association.] WELLINGTON, December 19. The hearing was commenced of the case the N.Z. Farmers’ Co-operative Distributing Company Ltd., v. the King, an action lor the recovery of £IOUW damages and an injunction. Mr. C. P. Skerrett, K.C., with him Mr. Luckie,. appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. tl. D. Beil, K.C., with him Mr. Fitzgibbon, for the Crown. Plaintiffs are the lessees of a piece of land in Victoria Street, the yearly rental being £455. Plaintiffs were in occupancy of the premises on the land until February, 1907. The Cr-own has, since 1906, occupied a section in proximity to plaintiffs as a State coal depot,, the dividing line between the sections being a right-of-way. Plainstiffs 'allege that defendants cause coal dust to be diffused over plaintiff’s premises in a way to cause a nuisance, and for that reason plaintiffs have been unable to let the premises in question. Plaintiffs also claim that while they have, in common with the Crown, the right to use the right-of-way mentioned in the pleadings, defendants placed quantities of earth and other materials on the surface of such right-of-way, and thereby caused the surface water to flow under plaint, iff s’ buildings and the land became wet and unwholesome for storage and other purposes. Plaintiffs accordingly claimed £IOOO damages and an injunction to restrain the continuance of the alleged nuisances. The defence was that the land was occupied by the Crown and had been used continuously for 20 ye ais as a eorfl depot, first by the Brunner Coal Company, then by the Grey A r alley Coal Company, then by the Westport Coal Company, and lastly by tho State coal depot, and'that during the whole of that time there had been the same stacking of coal and the same operations connected therewith as was the case to-day. Further, it was sub■mitted that plaintiffs, when they took their lease, were aware of the alleged conditions by reason of the coal depot. The other complaints in the action were speciality denied, and it was further contended that by reason of the continuous use of the land now occupied as a .State coal depot, the Crown had accrued to it a prescriptive right to use the land for iits present purposes. The Crown had carried on its op emtio ns under statutory authority. Finally, it is stated that the lands occupied by the parties to the suit were leased to them by Martin Kennedy, and that the lease granted by Martin Kennedy the plaintiffs were impliedly subject to the condition that Martin Kennedy and his lessees might carry on the business of a coal depot. The jury found that the suppliants property had been seriously diminished in value by the operations of the coal trade carried on by respondent’s officers, and awarded £205 -damages.