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

LAW REPORTS

SUPREME COURT ALLEGED MISREPRESENTATION CLAIM FOR DAMAGES ' In the Supreme Oourt yesterday, before Hia Honour Mr. Justice Edwards, J) rank Charles Farrow, merchant, of Wellington (formerly warehouseman, of Dannevirke), proceeded against Louis Henry Hoare, merchant, of Wellington, to recover the sum of .£2500 as damages for alleged misrepresentation in connection with the sale of a business. Mr. H. F. Von Haast appeared for Farrow, while Mr. C. P. Skerrett, K.C., with him Mr. V. B. Willis, appeared for Hoare. The business in question was a boot indent concern with neadquarters in Faris!, .Street, and known, under the style of J. W. Hoare and Co. Negotiations between the parties had taken place as far back as May, 1912, and in April, IBIS, Farrow entered into the agreement to purohase the business. He now'.alleged that it was on .account of misrepresentations as to the profits and as to agencies held by Hoare, that he (Farrow) was induced to purchase, and he therefore claimed .£2500 damages alleged to have been suffered by him. The 'defence was a< complete denial of misrepresentation. Farrow (it was said) had ascertained the value of the business, and made the purchase as the result of his own investigations. Further, he had expressed satisfaction with ■ the transaction six months after he had entered into the business, and had expressly confirmed and adopted the contract with the defendant (Hoare) for the pure-base of the- business. By consent of the parties, a jury bad been dispensed with. When the pleadings had been read, His Honour remarked that it was a proper case for a jury, and, on hearing,of the consent referred to, said that the jury should not have been dispensed with, unless by the consent of the Judge. He would, however,' go on with the hearing, although it was not fair to place all the responsibility on the Judge; Lengthy evidence is being called, and the. case was riot concluded last evening, when' the Court adjourned until 10.80 'a.m. to-day.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19141204.2.50

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2324, 4 December 1914, Page 7

Word count
Tapeke kupu
332

LAW REPORTS Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2324, 4 December 1914, Page 7

LAW REPORTS Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2324, 4 December 1914, Page 7

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