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

A Cheque Transaction.

(l'er I'ress Association). WELLINGTON, April 12. Dr. McArthur, S.AI., delivered judgment in a case recently heard of W. 0. Soiuerville, solicitor, v. Samuel J. Gibtjjons, a Claim of £SO Ts 9d. His Worship suicl the plaintiff's statement of claim set. forth tlui.t he was the holder in due course or l'or value of a cheqiue niude, signed, and issued by the defendant, dated 13th .May, 1002, and drawn on the Hank of New Zealand, Marlon, for £44 os, mid that the said cliuine was duly presented for payment and was dishonoured. Hefendnnt had not paid the same, nor any part thereof, wherefore plaintiff prayed judgment for the amount of the said cheque and interest with costs of action, llis Worship said the cheque was lintde ijv defendant und given by him to one Livingstone, as defendant said, in payment of wagers which had been lost by him to Livingstone at totul|isaltor odds. It was then negotiated by Livingstone to plaintilT, \?ho asserted that he receiwid it in due course without any notice that the cheq'ue was in payment of wngora» After reviewing the evidence his Worship said it was the duty of the plaint'ill to have impured further before taking the cheque, which was given for wagers made at totnlisator odd«, and plainUfV might easily have learnt this liet'ore he accepted it. If, then, the cheq'ue was given as defendant had stated, could plamtilT recover '? liis Worship thought not, and after citing authorities sai'd ; "I am therefore of opinion that the cheque was taken for an illegal consideration ; that, that, defect in tile title cannot be ranudicd; that plaintiff had at hand the means of learning the nature of the consideration but failed to avail himself of tliein, and that by reason of the illegality of the consideration ha cannot recover." Judgment was for defendant wiliiout costs. Mr Young (for the plaintilT) asked leave to appeal, as the question was one of considerable importance, and the application was granted.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19040413.2.14.3

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVI, Issue 84, 13 April 1904, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
332

A Cheque Transaction. Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVI, Issue 84, 13 April 1904, Page 2

A Cheque Transaction. Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVI, Issue 84, 13 April 1904, Page 2

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