LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 672, 24 November 1909, Page 3

LAW REPORTS.

SUPREME, COURT. ' CHINESE LANDLORDS AT. OHAKUNE. BOUNDARY DISPUTE. In. the Supreme Court yesterda)-, Mr. Justice Edward? heard an action, for'the recovery of purchaso.money on an Ohakune'section. Tho parties were:—Tho Commercial Agency Ltd., assignee of Joseph' Alfred Fletcher," storekeeper, of Baetihi (plaintiffs), and Chan Yin and Ah Duck King, storekeepers, of Ohakune (defendants). Mr. Von Haast appeared for ..the plaintiff company, and Mr. Beer© for Ah''Duck; King. Mr. Fell, who appeared for Chan Yin," intimated that his client's defence would not bo proceeded with. It was claimed that, by a written agreement, dated November 23, 1907, FJetober agreed to sell to Chan Yin and Ah Duck King,, a freehold section (24.7 perches) at Ohakune, fronting the main street, for JEGSO. A deposit of £50 was to: be paid, and another wouldbe due on December 2, 1907. Chan Yin and Ah Duck King took possession; .on December 2, 1907, and remained in occupation, On April 1, 1909, Fletcher, by deed of assignment made with the plaintiff, company ' and; his creditors, transferred tho land to the company. Due notice of tho assignment and transfer had been given to Chan Yin and Ah Duck King. The deposit' of £50 was paid; together with another .£l5O, and , the company agreed to allow Chan Yin and Ah Duck King twelve; months from August 1, 1908, in which to. pay tho balance of flio purchaso money, on. condition that i!l2 per month reduction, and interest tvere paid by defendants. A total sum of .£144 was paid in reduction of the balance, leaving ,£306 still owing. ' Interest ■on the balance up to July 2, 1909, had also been paid by them. Tho claim was for .£306 (balanco of purchaso money),, £6 15s. insurance premium, and £\ 12s. : Bd. (rates). The company asked that the Court should;order Chan Yin and Ah Duck King to specifiMlly perform the agreement. In the statement of defence, it was'set out thai. Ah Duck; King was ready to pay the balance of. the purchase money as soon' as the company could give the title to the land, Ah Du& King counter-claimed £353 Is.; Bd. as special damages: .£ls 15s. (for. plans'of buildings which ho was prevented from erecting), .£lO (loss on timber), .£lO (additional payment to builder), ;Cl2O (loss of business and custom), ,£2O (loss of rent), ,£173 Cs. Bd. (shortage in frontage), and .£IOO (general damages). Ah Duck.'King'alleged that, as ho was not conversant with the English language or customs, lie relied absolutely on : Fletcher's representations. ".:'.': •■".:''!. ';.■ .-.-..'

; In the course of evidence, it was stated that four sets of plans were drawn up for Ah Duck King's building, because of the doubt as to tho exact boundaries. •'•., .Counsel's addresses will be heard to-day. \, PRICE 0F : A MOTOR-CAR. His Honour Mr. Justice Chapman lieard a case yesterday/in which-David Zander claimed JE259 19s. from Mrs. J. H. Williams, balance •of .purchase money- of a,motor-car. . Mr. A. Gray appeared for plaintiff, and Mr.' S. Kirk'caldie for defendant. ';-..",''.'-.■'.'.. i The ) case- for tho "plaintiff was that' Mrs. Williams agreed'to purchase plaintiff's motorcar in June, 1908,; when the plaintiff, who ;is now a hotelkeoper .at Christchurch, was about to leave Wellington. A contract note prepared by plaintiff; and signed by defendant,' stating that defendant had purchased the. car for ,£2BO, and that it' was stored at-Trengrove and Petherick's garage on. her. account, was put in. Mr., Pethorick, at .her ; .request, engaged a chauffeur for her, and the chauffeur' on one. occasion; drove the car, when .Mrs. .Williams and Mrs. Zander took a ride together. 'Defendant .also' instructed Trengrove and Pethorick to make an addition and repairs to the car. f Some days later defendant told Petherick she would not take the car, and the. matter had remained in' that position ever since." •..'.. ■; ■'■ \ '•-, ;,-■■■ Evidence, was given by the plaintiff and Ernest ' Petherick, motor-car expert; - formerly ■ of the '..firm of Trengrove and Petherick. , The latter stated, in reply to a question:by Mr: Kirkcaldie, that if he had been tolling the car, ho. would■'. not have cared to give- a trial run to Paeknkariki and back. When he considered a- car was doubtful, he did not caro to ride in it... :-',-i ■ .'■'■.--., : ■••■.,,-■ --■ > i ~ Do you'consider the; car ;Was any good?—l' would^ rather not answer. 1 ' --v'-'..-'-.-■ ;•..■ ■To hi?' Honour: 'The'car was fit'to; run. : The case for the.'defence 'was that tho oar wasLworthlcss.yand that '.the plaintiff.was en-, ;trapped' ifflto pnrchaisirig it by means' of mis-'-representations as to its condition, and the .price paid, for' it by' plaintiff. ' ■•" "', ■'■'•■"'■■' Tho Jeane.Hnnter.' Williams; said that the.purchase of the car. was suggested by Mrs. Zander. On tho occasion of the -trial run,' they_ turned back at Oriental. Bay, >at the suggestion, of., plaintiff. , It-was-raintng.- Plaintiff . ( said-.tb.e car had cost him a good'deal more than .£260, besides repairs. This was just-after the ride. She went with the Zanders to their rooms, at the Hotel-Windsor, where plaintiff, just as she was leaving, brought in a document for her to sign, and asked for;a deposit. She' had no money her,, and .plaintiff asked Mrs. Zander-'to-.lend'"her..;.a- shilling. Mrs. Zander put two sixpences, on the table, and plaintiff: took them;- Witness signed the document. ..'- ""....:;: ,'.- ':,. , 'Harold chaaffeur,: in ~ Mri.v Williams's, employ,'stated that he had gone .right •through tie motoring trade in :Englandi and he would quote .£7O as the outsido value of the. car. It was not a .sound car,:and was out of date. An owner would not have; been wise to spend money bn repairing, the car, seeing that good cars could' bo bought .new 'now; quite cheaply.' :■ •'.-.■■.■'•.■:-' ;v;; # : ' •' ■•.'■'.••. /■ : '.'., y Mr. Kirkcaldie contended' that, .as the deI fendant had had ncbenent, she was entitled to rescind'tho contract oh. the ground of. fraud. The whole .conduct of ■ the plaintiff pointed to that, although tho";-sale" took place between | nominal friends. V : .;, ..;.:. . : ':M - - Mr. Gray remarkeditb'at.Mrs. Williams:un-': derstood fully all,-t'lio; particulars of the'sale, and she chose to'enter. into the contract herself, instead, of. leaving it to her husband. Plaintiff: had;not beendealing with a child, and the whole of'the-'debiils of the,transaction were discussed. ' y -,' : y ; ; y ; : .-''■-.:','.'■-. : His. Honour"; said;.'that'- he had come to. tho conclusion; thatytho'. onus rested on tlio defendant' to'rmake'out. : a distinct fraud on; tkb part of the plaintiff.. Sho had.made a bargain; of which she now,'with fairly good reason/ repented, but. : that r fell short of establishing doliberate fraud; without.'Ychich her defence was not made, out.' 'Judgment would be for the plaintiff, with ''-'costs,, as per scale, witnesses' 'expenses and disbursements to be fixed by tho iregistrar.'' •y-'--::.V.-.' , :'o ' ■ ■' , : I