CANCELLED CONTRACT

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 796, 17 October 1929, Page 10

CANCELLED CONTRACT

BUSHFELLERS’ CLAIM DAMAGES AWARDED from Our Own Correspondent TE KUITI, Today. In the To Kuiti Magistrate’s Court on Tuesday, before Mr. F. W. Platts. fcLM.. five To Kuiti labourers. Mark-j Koglich. Paul Lendich, Dick Sakolich, Tom Francievich and Mate Radomiljae, claimed. £93 19s 6d from G. A. Phillips, farmer, of Awakino, as damages as the result of defendant wrongfully cancelling a bushfelling contract. Plaintiffs claimed that in answer t • an advertisement by defendant they contracted to fell 120 acres of bush on defendant’s farm at Awakino at 32s 6d an acre. On June 28 defendant accepted their tender. Later he wired them to wait a day or two before starting the contract. In the interval, however, plaintiffs had engaged a motor-lorry, purchased stores, and proceeded to the scene of intending, if necessary, to spend a fev; days at Awakino. preparatory to commencing work. Defendant met them on arrival and said he had decided to cancel the contract owing to the serious illness of his father. He said he would see plaintiffs the next morning, when he definitely informed them that the contract was cancelled. Plaintiffs thereupon returned to Te Kuiti, and now claimed the sum of £l6,' cost of transport to and from Awakino: £ 219 s 6d, loss on stores bought for the contract and not used; and £75 loss on the contract. For defendant, Mr. U. T. Morton brought forward evidence that 35s to 40s an acre was the usual price fpr felling bush similar to that in dispute. | and therefore held that plaintiffs’ estiI mate of loss, namely £75, was too high. Defendant, in evidence, said he was still willing to give plaintiffs the contract if he decided to go on with it this year. Mr. Vernon, for plaintiffs, said the fact of their being out of work for four weeks was a direct loss as a result of the cancellation of the contract. The magistrate held that a clear offer liad been made- to Roglich on behalf of plaintiffs, and they were entitled to damages. Damages amounting to £42 15s were awarded to plaintiffs, with costs £7 13s.