LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1893, 30 October 1913, Page 3

LAW REPORTS.

COURT OF APPEAL. THE FINDING IN A "HARD CASE." , PURCHASERS' DEPOSIT. THE BENCH- EVENLY DIVIDED. Judgment was Riven in the Court of Appeal .yesterday in what His Honour tho Chief Justice described as "a hard case." The four Judges who heard the appeal; woro evenly divided and consequently the decision in the Lower Court was. affirmed. This was a case in which John Thomas Stembridge, of Pukekolie, clerk to tho Franklin County Council, appealed against a decision given, in the Supreme Court in favour of Donald Ewen Morrison, farmer, of Paparimu. Appellant had instructed Messrs. Buckland and Sons to act as auctioneers in tho sale of his goods and also to offer his farm for sale. The farm was not sold by auction, but on tho day after, -it was sold for £700 by private treaty to respondent. How The Deposit Was Paid. In the presence of the vendor, Mr. Morrison handed the auctioneer a cheque for £50 as a deposit in accordance with the conditions of sale. When the vendor had departed, however, the appellant asked Mr. Brooks, the ot the auctioneers, not to present the cheque at the bank as ho hadn't enough money to meet ity but instead gave Mr. Brooks two cheques made payable to him (Mr. Morrison) for £49 18s. 6d. as the deposit. The auctioneers, however,, did present the cheque (which was dishonoured) and deducted from the £49 18s. 6d. the amount owing to them by Mr. Morrison for goods bought at tho previous day's sale, the balance being placed to Mr. Morrison's credit at tho bank, which thus stood at £43. When the vendor was informed that the cheque had been dishonoured ho nullified the contract, though Mr. Morrison subsequently paid the balance as agreed. Mr. Morrison therefore proceeded in the Supreme Court for completion of contract- and secure dtho verdict, against which Mr. Stembridge appealed. Original Decision Stands. Judgments were read by the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) and Mr. Justico Sim,in favour of the appeal being allowed, and by Mr. Justice Denniston and Mr. Justice Cooper in favour of the appeal being dismissed. Consequently bj Section 58, the Judges being equally divided, tho decision of the Lower Court .stood affirmed, no costs being allowed r. M , r r u' Skerrett . K.C., with Mr. tr. H. Jie.ll represented the appellant, and Mr. J. R. Reed, K.C., and Mr. \V. Perry appeared for the respondent.