High Court of Australia
PORT
1? Mov. (93% kf ia
ELI CH ROMILLY SAWMILLS LTD CPjane.JUDGMENT . RICH i. STARKE Zs DIXON J. EVATT Ze
Je
FITCH ¥. PORT ROMILLY SAWMILLS LTD
This is en appeal from the Central Gourt of Papua, which under cl. 9 of the Appeel Ordinemce of 1909 has been considered without oral hearing or argument. te think that it is undesirable in the circumstances im this case to stete ressons for our conclusion. © Our opinion upon the question submitted in the case upon appeal is that the learned Judge was wrong in not allowing the amount of £1,279-1-1 which he awarded to him in the judgment' for services
G ha tet 99 .
rendered by him to the Compeny against the emount of $1,089-18-7
sdmitted by the appellant as being due from him to the respondent.
Accordimgly the appeal is allowed with costs end the
neon
question in the oese on appecl answered es stated.
The cause is remitted to the central Court of Papue.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate