ASSIGNMENT OF A GRAZING LICENSE

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 293, 30 August 1918, Page 8

ASSIGNMENT OF A GRAZING LICENSE

RESERVED JUDGMENT. In the Supreme Court yesterday, His Honour Mr. Justice Hoskiiig delivered reserved judgment in the ease of Gordon Christian Hare, slieepfarmer, Cheltenham, against Sidney-Frank I'errett, farmer, Palmerston North.

The statement of claim set forth that in and prior to July, 1915,t'tlie defendant held a grazing license from Charles Hongliton Mills, of Wellington, representing tli.). ituuinati Syndicate, as beneficiary owners : of the laud, for a term of live years froin May 17, 1912, at the yearly rental of £3fo, and the license contained, the restriction that the tenant was not at liberty, without tho previous content in writing of tlie landlord, to sub-let the said lands or to assign tho rights conferred upon him by tho agreement. On July '2, ]91f), defendant agreed to sell his interest in such license, together with 637 ewes, 11. rains, and other chattels, for a lump''sum of £1200, which sum was duly paid, At the negotiation for such sale defendant undertook,to obtain the necessary consent of tho Raumati Syndicate, and in reliance of such undertaking tho plaintiff entered into possession, and continued in possession until May 16, 1916. The defendant failed to obtain, such consent, and by reason of such failure plaintiff, after due notice, Went, out of possession. . The stock and chattels included in the salo were valued at £544 155.; and the proportion of purchase money represented by the said license was £655 55. ". Plaintiff claimed tho sum of £350 for loss of the value of the remainder,of the term of the license, the sum of .£l5O as general damages, and such fuller or other relief as tho Court might deem fit

It was contended for the defendant that ho did-apply for the'landlord's consent for the transfer, and in doing so had complied vriththe undertaking to transfer the license, an'd that there were no breaches on his part to prevent the landlord giving his consent. His Honour in his- judgment held t-bat. there iras an- undertaking on the part of the defendant, that there had been no breaches on his part to prevent his obtaining the landlord's consent to the assignment of. license to graze, and His Honour held that there had been a breach of that undertaking, but so far as the plaintiff 5 s benefit to the remainder of the terra was concerned he was not entitled'to , damages. With respect to damages under other headings, the matter was adjourned in order that the parties might submit further argument on the question. At the hearing Jlr. T. Neave appeared for the'plaintiff and Mr. C. Loughnan, of Palmerston North,' for the defendant.