SUPREME COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 49, 7 June 1910, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.

AN INSURANCE CASE. SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS. By Telegraph —Press Association. Wellington, Last Niglit. The adjourned case, Emily Prosser v. The Ocean Accident and Guarantee Corporation, Ltd., a claim for £l7O on a five insurance policy, was resumed in the Supreme Court to-day, before His Honor the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout). The policy covered a quantity of furniture, stock, etc., formerly housed in a residence in Cambridge Terrace, which was destroyed by fire last year. Mr. P. J. O'Regan appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. T. M. Wilford for tile defendant company. Evidence for the defence having been submitted, rebutting evidence was given on behalf of the claimant.

In his defence Mr. Wilford pointed out that Mr. Prosser already had had two fires, and the .present policy covering the goods was taken out by his wife, the plaintiff. There was suggested, counsel alleged, a transferred ownership, but there was apparently no deed. Counsel urged' that plaintiff had displayed a lack of good faith in attempting to derive benefit from the policy. A claim had been forwarded for a machine which had not been destroyed, and he alleged that there had been gross misrepresentation and exaggeration. He referred to a quantity of benzine kept in the house, and a gas jet which had been left burning, and which it was said was extinguished at 10 p.m., prior to the fire, although another witness «aid that it was alight at midnight.

Mr. O'Regan. for the plaintiff, contended that Mr. Prosser had never 4sked an insurance agent to accept a risk over any furniture destroyed in the fire. Nothing had been shown for the defence that any of the furniture had been removed. It was admitted that benzine was kept in the house. Regarding the machine which was declared for. and which was not destroyed, counsel said there was no intention of deliberate fraud. There had been no evidence to sustain the allegation of incendiarism against Mr. Prosser. The answers to questions when making out the proposal were only representations and not warranties.

His Honor reserved his decision,