HIRE PURCHASE AGREEMENT
CAR SEIZED AND SOLD COMPENSATION CLAIMED. Per Press Association. CHRISTCHURCH. December S. A case in which the plaintiff claimed compensation for the alleged wrongful seizure of a motor-car was heard at the Supreme Court to-dav, fceforo Mr Justice Stringer. H. H. Cook and Company, Ltd., land agents, plaintiffs, claimed that Herbert Henry Ccok, a director of the firm, agreed to purchase from the defendants, W. L. and H. E. Shiel, of Dunedin, a taotor-car for £535, taking in another car for £230 and giving two promissory notes for £152 10s each for the hnlanee. The defendants later seized fhe car. claiming that Cook had broken the terms of the hire purchase agreement under rihiah they claimed the car was sold. Cook alleged he had signeff a second document not knowing it* contents, end asked for *he return of the car and compensation. After lengthy evidence had been heard, the parties came to an agreement whereby the plaintiffs would nay the first instalment and give security for the second. His Honour said Cook was not entitled to rompensation, and must pay his own costs.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZTIM19261203.2.62
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
New Zealand Times, Volume LIII, Issue 12620, 3 December 1926, Page 6
Word count
Tapeke kupu
186HIRE PURCHASE AGREEMENT New Zealand Times, Volume LIII, Issue 12620, 3 December 1926, Page 6
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the New Zealand Times. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in