LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1466, 14 June 1912, Page 3

LAW REPORTS.

SUPREME COURT. THE CLAIM FOR £9,980 DAMAGES. FASCINA CO. MACHINES. HEARING STILL PROCEEDING. Lengthy evidence is being called in the action for alleged breach of agreement in respect of the New Zealand rights of a patent aerated water manufacturing machine, at present being heard in the Supreme Court before the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) and a special jury of twelve. The action was commenced on Wednesday, Tho claim is for .£9980 damages for alleged loss of profit for six years on the sale of Billows Patent Aerating Machines in connection with a sole agency for New Zealand and Fiji. Tho parties to'the action aro: William do Renzy, agent, of Palmerston North, plaintiff, and Fraser Ramsay (New Zealand), Ltd., general agents, Wellington, defendants. Mr. C. P. Skerrett, K.C., with Mr. G. H. Fell, appeared for de Renzy, and Sir John Findlay, K.C., with Mr. J. A. Tripe, appeared for Fraser Ramsay (New Zealand), Ltd. Mr. C. J. A. Loughnan, of Palmerston North, was also present to appear for C. F. Spooner, who was proceeding against de Renzy in a separate action claiming damages for alleged breach of contract in reference to an agency for the machines for Wellington and Hawke's. Bay 'districts. Ou the previous day it had been agreed that both actions should be heard together. Particulars of the claim and the defence were published in yesterday's issue. Numerous witnesses were called in support of the plaintiff's case, which closed ]ust before 3 p.m. Mr. Loughnan then opened Spooner's ease. Counsel explained at some length his client's connection with the agency, and pointed, out to the jury that they must not assume that (because of the arrangement that had been arrived at between the parties) Spooner and de Renzy were in collusion to build up an action for damages against Fraser Ramsay (New Zealand), Ltd. Spooner had agreed not to proceed for damages against do Renzy if the latter could not sustain an action against Fraser Ramsay, because de Renzy had always dealt fairly with Spooner, and tho two had been on intimate business relations, and had been hand in hand, so to speak. Counsel then went into detail concerning his client's claim, and outlined the evidence he proposed to call. The case for Spooner closed at about a quarter past i o clock. Before opening the case for _ Fraser Ramsay (New Zealand), Ltd. , Sir John Findlay raised the following nonsuit points:— That Clause 12 of the agreement (stating that the agreement with ae Renzy was upon the same terms and conditions as the agreement between the Fascina Co. and Fraser Ramsay) mado the existence of do Renzy's agreement dependent upon tho existence of the agreement with the Fascina Co. 2. That there was nothing in the agreement binding Fraser, Ramsay to continue the Fascina agreement, and that if they lost the agency, or gave it up, de Renzy had no right of action. 3. That under the agreement, there was no obligation on the part of Fraser Ramsay (a) to supply machines and goods at all, or (b) to supply them for any fixed term. Hi's Honour reserved these points, and counsel then proceeded with his address to the jury. After referring to the question of damages, Sir John Findlay said that de Renzy had stated that a copy of the agreement between Fraser Ramsay and the Fascina Company was not produced to him (de Renzy) before he signed the agreement of October 25. Fraser Earnsay, however, would call evidence to show that the agreement was produced .and read to de: Renzy.i and.'.thafc lie understood 'perfectly that tho term of his agency, was dependent upon Fraser Ramsay's being granted an extension of their term by the Fascina Company. • 'Sir John Findlay concluded his address at 5.5 p.m., when the Court adjourned until 10 a.m. to-day.