Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

PLAINTIFF NONSUITED

CLAIM FOR POSSESSION SHOP IN GEORGE STREET On the application of counsel for the defendant, Mr J. D. Willis, S.M., nonsuited the plaintiff in a case which was concluded in the Dunedin Magistrate s Court yesterday, when H. E. Shacklock, Ltd. (Mr D. L. Wood), claimed vacant possession of a shop at 331 George street from Richard Henry Braumann (Mr F. W. Guest). " , , James Gordon Crichton, a refrigeration engineer, said that he called on the defendant at the beginning of the present month, and asked if. he could sub-let the shop. The defendant mentioned the sum of £3OO for a premium, then referred witness to Mr Ferguson, of Ferguson, Scandrett and Co., real estate agents and auctioneers. Mr Ferguson asked for £4OO “ for the key ” of the shop, but witness declined. Later M r Ferguson informed the witness in a telephone conversation that, if the £4OO was paid, the receipt would be dated prior to that on the notice to quit given Braumann. Mr Wood submitted that the defendant made a breach of the 1944 regulations when he tried to obtain a premium from a prospective tenant. This premium was either for a lease not possessed by the defendant, or for goodwill for the business yet the defendant intended to carry on the same business a few doors along the street. Although the defendant was also in possession of a shop at 341 George street and had given every indication that he required one shop, he still tried to' continue his occupation of the shop at 331 George street, said Mr Wood. By his breach of the regulations, the defendant became an undesirable tenant, and his continued tenancy was inimical to the interests of the plaintiff. “There is no basis at all for the claim under the regulations,” said Mr Guest, counsel for the defendant. If the defendant has broken the law, it is a flatter for prosecution, but does not give the plaintiff the right to vacant possession. Mr Guest made an application for a nonsuit on legal grounds, which was allowed by the magistrate.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19471125.2.110

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26627, 25 November 1947, Page 8

Word count
Tapeke kupu
348

PLAINTIFF NONSUITED Otago Daily Times, Issue 26627, 25 November 1947, Page 8

PLAINTIFF NONSUITED Otago Daily Times, Issue 26627, 25 November 1947, Page 8

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert