RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3292, 8 September 1873, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Monday, September 8. (Before I. N. Watt, Esq., R.M.) Evans v. Brown.—Claim L 62 10s, corncommission on sale of York Hotel for L 2,500. His \Vorship gave judgment in this case as follows :—The plaintiff swears that he was, a few days before the 7th May last, employed by the defendant to find a purchaser at a price and a rate of commission agreed upon ; and the defendant swears that he never employed him at all, or placed the hotel in his hands for sale, but refused the plaintiff’s application to do so. The defendant’s statement is cor oborated by the plaintiff’s letter of 14th May, in which he requests defendant to place the property in his hands for one week, and to agree to pay him commission at the rate of 2£ percent., by signing a document to that effect enclosed in the letter ; and also by the refusal of the defendant to do so ; but the plaintiff’s statement is uncorroborated. I find therefore that there was no special agreement between the parties, but the plaintiff busied himself about the matter, and ultimately found a purchaser at the amount (L 2.500) required by the defendant, and introduced them to each other to complete the bargain. This might, if it stood alone, entitle the plaintiff to the usual commission, but the defendant says that ho told the plaintiff that he would not soli for less than L 2.500 “net cash," “clear,” and this seems to be borne out by his refusing to sign the writing sent to him by the plaintiff; and the defendant accounts for meeting the purchaser in the presence of the plaintiff by saying he thought plaintiff WHS the agent and acting in the interest of the purchaser; as the day before the sale was effected plaintiff tried to induce him (defendant) to take L 250 less than he wanted for the property. It does not appear to have been ever formally placed in plaintiff’s bands for sale, but tho defendant appears to have taken this position : —“ 1 will sell at L2, r 00 clear and free of all charges, and if you can make a commission by selling it for anything more, or get one from the purchaser, you may.” Judgment for the defendant, without costs.

Campbell v. Hope.—Claim for L 22 9s, proceeds of sundry bags. His Worship gave judgment in this case as follows:—I have carefully weighed the evidence in this case, and i have come to the conclusion that the defendant was the agent of the plaintiff, not of Boyle, and that at the time the defendant must have so considered himself, or he would not have submitted to the threat of the plaintiff to arrest him if he did not immediately forward the Ll9 to Hokitika. Judgment for the plaintiff, L 22 9s, with costs.