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

SUPREME COURT.

IN BANCO. Thursday, April 9. (Before his Honor Chief Justice Prendergast.) Barton v. Dalqetv and Others. -Mr Macassey, after summarising the facts of this case, pointed out that if Dalgety and Co. were allowed to have Burke declared a bankrupt the brewery property would be materially injured. Dalgety and Co. had not disclosed their true position when Barton took over the securities, therefore they were estopped from asserting a claim that might be injurious to Barton. The learned counsel would assume that the agreement between Burke and Dalgety and Co. in 1871 made the latter pro tanto the former’s bankers. His Honor said that for the present purpose he thought there was sufficient made out to, assume that a representation had been made to the effect that Burke’s liability was only LlljOOO. He was disposed to grant an interim injunction, but there was this difficulty ; he would be leaving Dunedin shortly, and he thought ex parte injunctions should be granted unless a very clear case was shown of urgency and of a state of things recently arisen. Mr Macassey said negotiations had been going on between the parties to the suit, and it was only a letter written three days ago that had placed plaintiff in the present extremity—the negotiations having failed and one of the bills falling due to-morrow. Though that did not appear on the declaration an affidavit could be filedputting it before the Court. His Honor; I think you may amend the declaration by inserting a general allegation of that sort; and that being done, I will grant an ex parte injunction. Martin v. Lawlor and Another.— Mr Macassey moved for an administration decree on the part of plaintiff, as one of the creditors of the estate of the late P. Sheldrick. There was no appearand of Lawlor, but Mr M‘Keay appeared : for Bishop Moran, the other defendant—as residuary legatee, being Roman Catholic bishop of the diocese—who consented to judgment, provided that the costs of the suit were not personally visited on him. His Honor granted the order, as desired.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD18750430.2.14

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Evening Star, Issue 3801, 30 April 1875, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
345

SUPREME COURT. Evening Star, Issue 3801, 30 April 1875, Page 3

SUPREME COURT. Evening Star, Issue 3801, 30 April 1875, Page 3

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