Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DISTRICT COURT REEFTON.

Monday, November 26, 1883. (Before Hia Honor Judge Broad.) LYNCH V. INANQAHUA COUNTY COUNCIL. This was an appeal from the finding of .assessors in the Court. The case was argued at the last sitting of the District Court, when judgment was reserved His Honor delivered a written judgment, which was as follows : — This is an appeal from the Warden's. Court upon the grounds that the Warden erroneously construed the document when he directed the Jury (1st 1 , that it was a contract relating to mining ; and (2nd), that it was a contract into which the County Council had power to enter. These two questions of law were carefully and ably argued before me, and I have had time (which the Warden had not in the usual hurry of n trial) to carefully consider the real nature of the agreement. It seems clear that the very thing bargained for did not relate to mining, and the contract is not therefore one which could bo enforced by the Warden's Coui - t Its object is quite foreign to anything in the nature of mining as defined by the Mines A ct. The last covenant which is part of the consideration for the contract may, in a sense, be said to relate to mining ; but the right the appellants wished to get and which the respondent agreed to give (and keeping in view the avowed purpose for which that right was wanted and granted), was not in its nature a matter relating to mining. It is unnecessary to decide the second question. This appeal must be allowed with costs £12 12s and judgment entered in the Warden's Court for the appellants with costs, to be ascertained by the Wai'den. DEVINE (APPELLANT) V. KELSO (RESPONDENT.) This was an appeal from adecision in the Resident Magistrate's Court wherein defendant in the Court below was fined £30 | and costs for a breach of the Licensing Act, in selling spirituous liquors without '' a license » Mr Jones appeared for the appellant, and Mr Haselden, Crown Prosecutor, con- ) ducted the defence. j The evidence taken was a repetition of that head in the Magistrate's Court, and ; which was fully reported a the time by - us. £

Counsel having addressed the Court at Bonie length, Hia Honor delivered a written judgment, allowing the appeal and quashing the conviction without costs.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/IT18831128.2.6

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Inangahua Times, Volume VIII, Issue 1329, 28 November 1883, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
391

DISTRICT COURT REEFTON. Inangahua Times, Volume VIII, Issue 1329, 28 November 1883, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT REEFTON. Inangahua Times, Volume VIII, Issue 1329, 28 November 1883, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert