SUPREME COURT

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 286, 27 August 1920, Page 3

SUPREME COURT

A MOTOR-CAR DEAL PRINCIPAL OR AGENT? In the Supremo Oourt yesterday, jonn Dlneen, probation officer, of Wellington, sued Llcwdllvn Hathawny for tho sum of £412 10s. This amount, •he alleged, ho had paid the defendant's agent for a motor-car, of which he had never taken delivery. Mr. T. 0. A. Hislop appeared for tno plaintiff and Mr. H. F. O'Leary for tho defendant. Tho statement of claim was to tho effect that on April 30 Inst the plaintiff, being desirous of purchasing a second-hand car fit lor lmmediato uee an a taxi-cab, ugreed to purchase from the defendant a seven-seater Apperson car which tho defendant and the ai»ent of tho latter represented to be suitable. Plaintiff paid to the defendant's agent (Stanton's, Limited) the purchase price (£412 10b.). After making the payment he attempted to start the car. but could not'get it to go. Defendant said that only minor adjustments were needed; and agreed to i tike these. He failed to put the car in a concVtlon In accordance with tho representations made, and plaintiff never took delivery. Though plaintiff demanded the return of the purchaso price, the defendnnt failed to pay it or any nart of It. Hathaway alleged in his statement of defence that any Bale to the plaintiff wan made by Stanton's. Limited, as principal and not as agentß for the defendant. Ho stated that in the month of April lie «m approached by O. Browne, tho representative of Stanton's, Limited, with'reference to the sale of his car. Ho told Browne that he wanted £400 for the car. but he refused to five Stanton's. Limited, authority to sell the car on his behalf. Urowne later came to him and requested him to put the cur in order and then sell it for £400,.-but this he "refused to do. Eventually/defendant agreed to sell the car to Stanton's, Limited, for £575, allowing Stanton's, Limited. £25 to put the car in order; and thereupon Stanton's, Limited, bought the car for the sum of ii'ls, ivhich was paid to defendant by cheque on or about April 16. Defendant'contended'that If any warranty was given regarding the car, it waß given by Stanton's, Limited, as principals, and not-as-agents. The plaintiff called Browno aB ono of the witnesses in support of hia caße. The hearing was not concluded when the Court rose at 4.50 - p.m.