Plunkett v Smith [1911] HCA 58

76 HIGH COURT [191

H.C. or A. that the recital in question is of a less high character; but

112. reading the contract and the documents it incorporates, as a con-— eee

Muxe Sistent whole, and not denying to the recital its weight as an = honest declaration inducing the contract, I am driven to the con- SYDNEY ees é zi Corrora- clusion that the parties intended the Council to be bound.

mere I therefore agree that this appeal should be allowed.

Isaacs J.

Appeal allowed. Judgment for plaintifison demurrer with costs. Respondents to pay costs of the appeal.

Solicitors, for the appellants, Minter, Simpson & Co. Solicitors, for the respondents, Dawson, Waldron & Glover. BL 'Cons Frame dusty a WAPlaming ROA) 192 [HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.] THOMAS PLUNKETY . : . i . APPELLANT; AND WILLIAM SMITH . - % ss ' . RESPONDENT.

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA,

H.C. op A, By-law—Valitity— Municipalities Act 1906 ( W.A.) (No. 32 of 1906), secs. 179, 304,

1911. 308, 335. pe A by-law made by a municipal Council provided that :—* Every person ao, who shall hereafter erect alter or add to any building shall comply with the Sava Se following vegulations:— . . . . (e) No fascia or projecting eave con- Griffith 0.J., structed of inflammable material shall be erected at a less distance than Barton and . ae O'Connor 33. 2 ft. 6 in, from the boundary of an adjoining property."

Hdd, that the by-law was invalid, there being nothing in Part XV. of the Municipalities Act 1906 to give the Council power to regulate the material or structure of roofs, except as to the covering.

Decision of the Supreme Court of Western Australia reversed.

14. C.L.R.] OF AUSTRALIA.

AppEAtL from a judgment of the Full Court of Western Australia H.C. or A

pronouncing a certain by-law made by the Municipal Council of Leaderville to be valid.