DAMAGES CLAIM

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 1, Issue 152, 19 February 1932, Page 6

DAMAGES CLAIM

(From Our Own Correspondent.)

dismissal case DAIRY FACTORY SECRETARY SUES TO RECOYER £100. VERDICT FOR DEFENCE.

WHAKATANE, Wednesday. Edwin John Arlow, of Whakatane, formerly secretary of the Arawa Dairy Co., of Whakatane, and who had been dismissed from that position in December last, claimed £100 damages for wrongful dismissal from the proprietors of the company, Allen and Findley, Ltd., grainbrokers, Auckland, in the Whakatane Magistrate's Court, this week. A counterclaim was filed for £150 for monies which had been advanced to suppliers by Arlow contrary to the express instructions of the company, and which were considered irrecoverable, and £27 Os 8d for monies paid by the company for the use of Arlow. Arlow, giving evidence, stated he was engaged in June, 1931, at £6 per week and controlled all local financing and always advised Auckland of the position of affairs. He alleged that the company spent money advanced to meet butter-fat payments in capital expenditure. In December he informed Auckland that finance would be wanted on December 20 to meet accounts other than butter-fat payments and supplied a list of 20 firms to whom monthly accounta were owing. On the 20th he obtained authority from Findley to pay out lld per lb for butter-fat and went to Auckland for his holidays, saw both Allen and Findley, and informed them that payout amounted to £2900, and other accounts would amount to £1240, a total monthly pay-out of £4140. He told Findley if the bank wired for money to send along £500. On his return from holidays the factory manager, Hooper, told him that his services were dispensed with and no reason was given. He rang Auckland and : was told that certain sums were del manded by the Whakatane Union Bank and that he "was a nice one to lei t them in the soup as they had to scoui i Auckland to raise the money." Latei i he was presented with a cheque foi i £12, representing one week's notici i and a week's wages that were due i and he refused to accept this in ful , settlement.

Not Dismissed Before. Cross-examined, he stated he was not dismissed from his previous positions with Joseph Nathan and Co., where he was getting £1000 a year. While with the Sunbeam Milking Machine Co. he was getting at least £12 per week. No charges of dummying orders had been made against him. He admitted having paid his own personal account, incurred 12 months prior with Northern Automobile, Co., amounting to £8 3s 2d, with monies belonging to the defendant company, but had intended to settle same on a squaring up of running expenses of his car, which the company agreed to pay. Altered Dockets. He also admitted having altered the eream grading dockets after same had been graded by the certified gradir, and did so as he considered the grading was not being carried out properly. The company knew of his alteration. He purchased £9 odd cf cigars but denied he used same for personal use, but for customers and suppliers in the interests of the company. Counsel for defendant applied or a non-suit on the ground that there was sufficient cause for dismissal, ind that plaintiff was only entitled co reasonable notice: Plaintiff had admitted falsifying certain company records which the company, under Government regulations, was forced co keep and this in itself was sufficient justification. Secondly, the payment by plaintiff of his personal account with monies belonging to the company actually constituted a theft of the monies. He had continually disregarded instructions given and had advanced monies contrary to instructions and had interfered with the work of the factory manager. Extremely Annoyed. William Frederick Allen, director of the defendant company, said that in December, although Arlow had assured him there was sufficient money for the pay-out, during the holidays he received urgent requests from the Whakatane bank manager for sums totalling £1350. He was extremely annoyed at this, and he issued immediate notice of Arlow's dismissal. He gave no authority to Arlow to alter the cream dockets.. He denied Arlow had informed him they would want money for the December pay-out and even in his letter advising of accounts that had to be paid, Arlow had merely stated that he might have to draw on them for money. In giving his decision, the magistrate, (Mr. S. L. Paterson, S.M.), stated that plaintiff had admitted falsifying the cream dockets and entries in the books, records which the. company was compelled by Government regulation to keep. That in itself was sufficient justification for Arlow's dismissal without notice. Secondly, Arlow had admitted he had paid his own personal account out of the company's money without authority. With regard to the trouble at Chrsitmas over the bank calling up, the burden of proof was on the plaintiff and in this he had failed. The plaintiff would be non-suited. Defendants agreed to waive their counterclaim without costs to either party.