MAGISTRATE’S DECISION

Hokitika Guardian, 24 April 1925, Page 3

MAGISTRATE’S DECISION

BY TELEGRAPH—-PRESS ASSN., COPYRIGHT

ASHBURTON, April 24

Mr Mosley, S.M.. gave a written judgment in the ease Digbv v. P. Stephens (Hokitika), heard on April 3rd, the claim being for £8 2s. in which the issue was whether a trainer can pledge an owner’s credit for stabling a horse and the trainer’s keep. The -Magistrate said it was clear from the evidence that a contract was made by Kingan. Stephens’ trainer, and plaintill' looked to Ivingan to pay at the time the contract was made. Plaintiff seems to have failed to make any enquiries a.s to the ownership of the horse and to have been quite satisfied to look to Ktngan lor payment. The only grounds on which the action can he sustained against Stephens is that Ivingan acted as his agent, or steward, and had expressed or implied authority to pledge his prineipal’s credit. It was clear from the evidence that Kingnn had no express authority. As regards implied authority the Magistrate said he was entirely unable to assume it. It must l:e taken as common knowledge Unit trainers have no authority to pledge an owners credit for loose boxes and hoard, nor was he aware that such a custom existed from which implied authority might- he deduced. Judgment for defendant with £5 17s costs. “My opinion.” said the Magistrate,

“is that an honest man has been taken down, and I would like to give judgment in his favour if I could.”