View report page

17
the Building Act Committee of the Council which
initiated the proceedings. The Appellate Tribunal was
similarly constituted at the hearing of the Clapham cases,
and it was therefore proposed to have the matter re-heard.
The builders thereupon withdrew their appeal, and agreed
to set back their buildings to the respective general
lines of buildings as defined by the Superintending
Architect. This having been done, the summonses which
had been issued by the London County Council and the
Board in the matter were withdrawn.
Repairing October, 1892, the Board having
Avenue Road
and crescent Lane. executed certain works of repair to
Avenue Road under the provisions of the Metropolis
Management Amendment Act, 1890, apportioned the
cost of the work upon the owners of property there.
One of the owners refused to pay the amount charged
to him, and proceedings were taken to enforce payment.
The Magistrate having decided in favour of the Board,
the owner appealed (on the ground that the Magistrate
and not the Board was the proper party to decide what
were "necessary works of repair") first to the Court of
Queen's Bench and thence to the Appeal Court, where
the Court, consisting of Lords Justices Lindley, Kay, and
Smith, gave an unanimous judgment dismissing the appeal.
The Board charged in the same way upon the owners of
property the cost of repairing Crescent Lane, Clapham.
This lane has been in existence for many years, but is not
a parish road. At the time the repairs were undertaken
there were posts at one end, which had been erected to
prevent the carting of building materials to an adjoining
estate. The Magistrate declined to enforce the charge
on the ground that the lane had not been open for public
carriage traffic for a period of six months immediately
before the repairs were executed. As the posts have now
been removed this objection will not prevail should it be
necessary to execute further repairs to the lane.
B