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

APPEAL COURT.

ALLEGED EVASION OF STAMP DUT¥. AN IMPORTANT CASE. Per Press Association. Wellington, Tuesday. The Court of Appeal to-day began the hearing of a case in re Moore, deceased —Townend v. the Commissioner of Stamps. Appellant is Anne Quayle Townend, daughter of George Henry Moore, deceased, and co-executor with two executors under his will. Testatoi died at Christchurch on 7th July, 1905 in his 93rd year, leaving all his property to his daughter. His estate in New Zealand was certified by respondent to bi of the value of £086,158, on which duty amounting to £34,307 was claimed. The executors declined to pay, claiming the value was £253,936, and the balance £432,222, was the absolute property oi appellant, having come into her possession before her father's death. Respondent denied this, and claimed, alternately, that it was put into appellant's name to evade the duty, or that it came into her hands as a deed of gift, and was therefore liable to duty. The Minister for Stamps petitioned for leave to examine appellant as to how she became possessed of these moneys, and t"he whole case was moved into the Court of Appeal for argument. Mr. Skerrett, K.C., and Mr. Brown, of Christchurch, appeared for appellants, ■ and Mr. Stringer, IC.C., and Mr. Myers for respondent. Mr. Skerrett contended that before respondent could succeed it must be shown the moneys were transferred by appellant as testator's attorney without his knowledge or consent, but the whole of the evidence was against this. Correspondence before the Court showed plainly it was Moore's intention to transfer as much during his lifetime as he could. In 1900 appellant opened a banking account, and all moneys payable to testator were paid into his daughter's account with his concurrence. Such payments were gifts, and not subject to duty. The means adopted to escape the duty were perfectly legal and unimpeachable. Continuing, Mr. Skerrett said the course pursued by testator and his daughter was with the advice of eouns?) A gift, although made for the purpose of evading duty, was complete and bono fide. Appellant exercised complete control over moneys paid into her name, there being no reservation on the father's part. On the ot'jer side, Mr. Stringer contended there \vas not sufficient evidence of gift. Where there was a gift without writing it must be completed by manual delivery. In this case appellant received money as attorney for her .father, and there was no manual delivery, nor was there a deed. Further, appellant was trustee for her father under power .it attorney, and that made the presumption against the gift the stronger, The case is unfinished.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19071016.2.26.2

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 61, 16 October 1907, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
438

APPEAL COURT. Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 61, 16 October 1907, Page 2

APPEAL COURT. Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 61, 16 October 1907, 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