APPEAL ON £50,000 CLAIM

Hawera Star, Volume LIII, 16 June 1933, Page 4

APPEAL ON £50,000 CLAIM

DISMISSAL BY JUDGES

MAJORITY VERDICT GIVEN

(By Telegraph—Press Association.*

WELLINGTON, June 15

The Court of Appeal this morning delivered reserved judgment against W. D. Lysnar in his claim on the National Bank of New Zealand.

In August, 1932, a writ was issued by Lysnar against the National Bank of New Zealand claiming over £50,000 damages for alleged breach oi contract. After a hearing- extending over four days Mr. Justice MacGregor gave judgment against Lysnar, allow.ng £250 by way of costs. The Court of Appeal' in March heard Lysnav’is appeal against this decision. Lysnar submitted that the National Bank was not entitled to bring evidence showing there was an alteration to the with the bank, even if the matter had been raised in the bank’s pleadings, because (1) such evidence conflicted with the terms of the written contract, and (2) the bank was not allowed to avail itself of such evidence.

The majority of the Court (Judges 'deed and Smith) held that the appeal should he dismissed. The concluding portion of their judgment states: ‘.‘We are of the opinion that appellant has proved neither a tripartite contract nor if two contracts were intended in form that a contract between himself and the bank ever became operative. In result the judgment appealed from is, in our opinion, right and the appeal must be dismissed with costs on the highest scale but not as from a distance.” ill’. Justice Ostler said he should have likod to have agreed with the judgment of the majority of Court, but he was unable to do so. Even if appellant had succeeded in the full amount of his claim it appeared to him that appellant would still be hopelessly insolvent because he claimed only' £50.000 and the bank’s claim against'him amounted to £70,000. For this, reason all the litigation seemed to be merely beating the air. For the reasons contained in his written, judgment he was of the opinion that the appeal should he allowed.