AGENT'S INSTRUCTIONS

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 715, 15 July 1929, Page 11

AGENT'S INSTRUCTIONS

APPEAL COURT GIVES JUDGMENT DECISION FOR VAILE AND SON Press Association WELLINGTON, Today. In the appeal case, S. Vaile and Son, Dtcl., v. S. J. D. James, the Full Court delivered judgment allowing the appeal. Mr. Justice Adams, delivering judgment, said:—“Respondent says that at the time the appointment was signed lie asked appellants to look after the property generally, and that he understood they were to look after the property in every way, and considered that it was not necessary to put that into the instructions, but appellants’ authority is defined in the document that responsibility must be determined. According to that definition it purports to be an agency during respondent's absence from New Zealand, and therefore, ox vi termini, came to an end early in January, appellants thereafter acting under verbal instructions given by respondent from time to time.

“If instructions were given to x*elet the property those instructions were withdrawn in February, and were never renewed. Appellants’ only authority after the first week in February was to endeavour to dispose of the property by sale or exchange. No doubt they might have reminded respondent of the stipulation in the insurance policies, but these were never in their possession, and the policy for £SOO was in the name of the mortgagee. **ln our opinion respondent has failed to establish the alleged duty. The appeal must, therefore, be allowed, and judgment will bo entered for appellants with costs on the middle scale, here and in the court below, includng costs of interlocutory matters.”