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

THE CASE STANFORD V. LIQUIDATORS “DAILY TIMES” COMPANY.

[Press s|»eciii9 Wire.] Dunedin, April 23. In tho Supremo Court to-day, Justices Johnston and Williams gave judgment in tho case Stanford v. tho liquidators of tho old “Daily Times” Company. Tho judgment was a very long one, and at one point contained this statement; —“ But for the elaborate argument on the subject, we should not have thought it arguable that a secret agreement by an intending purchaser with one of several shareholders or co-owners to pay him a sum of money to do his best to carry out a sale at a certain price, was! founded on anything but an illegal consideration. If such an agreement is founded on an illegal consideration then, as tho money was paid in order to obtain the property in question, and not for the purchase of anything the individual shareholder could sell, it must bo treated as part of tho purchase money and accounted for by the person who receives it.” The judgment concluded as follows : “ The case is this. Two of the largest shareholders in a company, one of them being a director, conclude together to prevent a sale of tho company’s assets unless a sum of money is paid by the purchaser to each of them, in addition to what he pays to the company. They make a secret bargain with the purchaser to carry out their design, and each of them receives a largo sum of money in pursuance of it. Can it be doubted that they are altogether in pari delicts, and that each must be considered as a trustee for the company in respect of tho money he has received. As we are of opinion for the foregoing reasons that the defendants are entitled to succeed, it becomes unnecessary to enquire into the circumstances under which the money was handed over by plaintiff to the liquidators. Tho liquidators therefore retain possession of the extra amount of £25 per share paid to Stanford, and which he had placed in their hands pending the result of the trial.”

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GLOBE18790424.2.16

Bibliographic details

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1615, 24 April 1879, Page 3

Word Count
345

THE CASE STANFORD V. LIQUIDATORS “DAILY TIMES” COMPANY. Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1615, 24 April 1879, Page 3

THE CASE STANFORD V. LIQUIDATORS “DAILY TIMES” COMPANY. Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1615, 24 April 1879, 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