Lost Dividend Warrants

Horowhenua Chronicle, 16 April 1910, Page 4

Lost Dividend Warrants

« A shareholder in the Grtat Xortiiern Railway Company failed tc receive a dividend that he w.a.s entitled to in respect of the half-year ended 31st "December, 1908. and accordingly in due eonr.se applied to the company for n duplicate warran,!:. The company, however, dedined to issue n duplicate iinlexs the shareholder .signed an indemnity which the latter regarded as unreasonable and too wide 'in its scope. inasmuch as it railed upon him to indemnify tin; company for nti.vtli-in.ir that might happen even from the acts and defaults of its own servants; and accordingly, failing to ' btain redress, lie brniie-hit -an nctior av'iu.st the company wh.icih cvune before ln's Honour Judge "Willis in I 'he Clerkonwcll Countv Court on rh■• 2-ltli ult. His Honour cave iudtriiien.t in favour of the plaintiff, certifying for crsts on the highest "eale. and he only gave leave to ■appeal on the terms "that- the company bore its own costs of appeal, and of the present trial in anv event. His finding appears shortly to have been on the ground thai the dividend warrant had been issued and forwarded bv post entirely at the instance of the defendant "ompany, ni>d that .irr-orcliiiglv such decisions as had been quoted by the defendants did not ni-et the ea«e With regard to the cr-ntenti'm that the plaintiff was n,)-, eivtitb'd re «'ie for the dividend, but, only for delivery to him of a warrant for the amount of the dividend, he thought that the decision in IhiH, v. Wa.t.son disposed of that point: but, if itdid not, he said he would give leave to amend the plaint in anv manner necessary to do complete ius.tice between the parties. Tn view of the fact that the dividend warrant had apparently been absolutely lost, havini.ir lapsed and never been .presented far payment, it will be that it was quite unnecessary to waste svmmthv on the attitude adoptc l '•v tli" railway company. Apart from all otlcr cirouinsteiK'os, no enn now present in i in Dii.t-of-cl.nt-f> dividend warrant could claim pavinc.";. + h"ivof as a m..rter of right without o-.ivintr any explanation whatever ■i.s to hc.w he had ennm bv i-t. Aean uncenditional indeni'dtv iq f-ir b--voed >hp limit, thaimight be n>nr,>v.'Vd as vp".cMvibl<' "...'..-«:;, rv f f >,. -11. 0 f ,f J-},,,. "ompn.nv. "Wri-Uhv roTTin-nie" in a high-handed manr"i'. H r -.„ + ;..(•„,.i,.,... +r> ,-).. , 41 ,,-. +1 , ( ,;„ ■''■-— A, f - ; 1 ~ n~..-,~,..„..1 ;.,.i;.,;„i r ..,, vv ,„-. __ <er lu> A ~,.,.,,.,*. •■"t." r.aivh,,,.