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

FARMER'S BANKRUPTCY.

SPECULATION IN SHARES. CLAIM BY MINING COMPANY. OPPOSED BY ASSIGNEE. (By Telegraph.—Own Correspondent.) HAMILTON, this day. Early in May last a well-known farmer of Frankton, William Duncan, went bankrupt, his liabilities being stated at £1677 and his assets nil. Bankrupt, in a statement, said he had paid nearly £14,000 into a mining venture known as the Zeehan Consolidated, which he was led to believe would be highly productive. He had lost all his money. At the first meeting of the creditors, Dominion Securities, which runs the Zeehan Consolidated, lodged a proof of debt, claiming a balance alleged to be duo under an agreement to pay calls to the company amounting to £1009. In the proof of claim lodged, no mention was made that the company claimed a lien on shares under the articles of association, which operated as security. At this first meeting it was claimed by the assignee that shares must be treated as fully paid-up. Immediately after the meeting a claim was made on the shares by the company under its lien. Lengthy negotiations followed regarding the realisation of assets, and as to whether the shares were not fully paid-up. Eventually the company lodged an amended.proof, claiming its security The official assignee rejected the amended claim in order to bring the matter before the Court to decide as to whether the amendment was in order, and, secondly, as to whether the shares were or were not fully paid-up. To-day, before Mr. Justice Blair, the company moved for an order reversing rejection by the assignee and declaring that the shares are paid up to the amount of 13/4 only. Mr. P. H. Watts (Hamilton) and Mr. A. Fotheringham (Auckland) opposed the motion and argued that rejection was right because the company had elected to prove as an unsecured creditor, and that the application for amendment of claim,' if in order, was made too late. Judgment was reserved.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19290919.2.77

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Auckland Star, Volume LX, Issue 222, 19 September 1929, Page 8

Word count
Tapeke kupu
320

FARMER'S BANKRUPTCY. Auckland Star, Volume LX, Issue 222, 19 September 1929, Page 8

FARMER'S BANKRUPTCY. Auckland Star, Volume LX, Issue 222, 19 September 1929, Page 8

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