DISTRICT COURT.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XLIII, 30 January 1909, Page 1

DISTRICT COURT.

THE KOLLET BANKRUPTCY. .(Before His Honor Judge Haselden.) On the District Court resuming after lunch yesterday, bankrupt, further cro!(3-examined, said that the £1000 paid into Levwn and Rollet was a present to his wife. She lent the firm [he money temporarily, and the money was credited to Mrs Rollet. He-examined by Mr Fell: He told Mr King, of the National Bank, that he owed hU wifo the value of her Tadmor property. . ' Francis William Hamilton, Managing Director of Buxton and Co., W.,fc posted that bankrupt owed his firm £300 or £40D. Early in 1908 the firm press- , ed Rollet for a settlement. In June, i ISOB, ho asked Rollet if he was still | '■<\ th° fiiin of Levien and Rollet. Rol- , le* answered Uiat he was, and thatj when he Rot rid of his North Island :)ropert:rs he was t-oming back to Nel.<>n to manaKt" the htt'siness. To Mr Maginnitv: At tho time RoJlut owed them £300 or £400 Buxton md CompinV held SO bales of hops belonging to bankrupt. The hops were damaged, and would bo worth £3 or £4 a bale. Kollct took the hops away, and gave a p.n. for a mouth for their Cecil King, manager of the National 'lank of New Zealand at Nelson, fitat- • d that he allowed the firm of Levien .wid Rollet an overdraft that was to be -pciirrd. In May the Bank pressed Ti-ollci lor isnirity, and obtained it in Juno on equitable mortgage of shares. Ths Rank did not care much about the security, and later in June Rollet was a.4:ed 'to realise the security or to | borrow '!(■ moivy elsewhere. On Julj'i J3th ti^ Bank issued a writ ajrainstilollet, but it was not sorved. Rollet, found the money (£1600) on August. •9th. He did not know till August' i6ih that the firm of Levien and Rollet had been dissolved j when he did know It h? stopped the old firm's account, I md th? new firm's account was opened immediately, but it was not guaranteed. Kiillet never told him that he was , guaranteeing trie new firm's • account: because he owed his wife money.. j To Mr Maginnity: Levien ha-1 , spoken to him prior to August of it beji.; -contemplated that Rollet would transfer his interrst in Levien and Rollet to his wife ; but he did not know of the dissolution till he saw it published. E. C. Kelling, Clerk of the Court, nave formal evidence of the writ bein? served by the Bank. Sir Maginnity proceeded to bring out the oth?r fide"; but it- was eventually arranged that a statement be drawn up. on which legal argument should be taken at 10 a.m. to-day. The points of the statement v;cre agreed to ns follows: — The Tnrtmnr property was pun-has: d hy Rollst for Mrs I?ol:ct whon Relict, was more than solvent. I The £1000 paid by Rollet into the I Sim of Levien and Rollet to th-e credit of Mrs Rollet was paid by him when ■ h" wan more than solvent. Roll^t save security" to the Bnnk to secure the account of the firm of Levien and Rollet prior to 15th August. So far as th? Hunk was concerned, ,-.nd so fa i* as tth;-r creditors of the firm of Levi°p. and Boll.'t wire concerned the partnership in I.cvirn and R'illet lsst»d until 15th August, 1903. The d??d of '.iytolution. provided 'or iuch dissolution on sth May, 1938. Ac b°tw»en the pnitners th>rn.«;lvef the partnership was dU/clvL-d on Cth May, 1903. Aftor sth May Mrs Rolltt wr.s l'nbk for the deV.t<; of th- new firm, including liabilities left by the old firm. On fflh Auguct Rollet paid to the B:;n!< £1331 out.of his own estate. This i.aH tli? old firm's indebtedness to the Bank, and left a rrcdit balance, which was drawn and piid into the new firm's account of £326. If tr.;..-c' ; ."n b-.^-.-; (;0--:-l'. ;-.iv 'v; is.-;imii! thii the £1000 v. .is paid l>v Mr IJcilet to I.cv>i and 11-oi'-^t a. Ix v.if.'' rcqu:<;t or fay her authority. The monies received by Rollet from snie of Tadmor property 'were received hy him for his wife's use, and on her account. The payment of ths £1331 to the Bank was by his wife's authority and in moivnT* *"f money received by Rollet' from Tadraor. The adjudication was- 30th October, 1908, and relating back to 24th September, 1905. The £1000 was given sth Oecember. 1008. Was the gift of £lfiCo i.'.vulid under Bection 75a of lh« • I 'r!.-ri''-TiH!i<y Act?" If it was, both >.h P.-l!^ scad the firm of Levien ani Roiltt must account to th(> Deputy Oftioiiil Assignee. If no ■ .■ icr n>ad--> re SloriC. ?an the £1331 ri'ld ky Rollet to the Bank, tc redeem hi.' semiritir*. be set off against the £400 <lvi* by Rillet to the firm!