COMPLICATED LAND DEAL.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 4, 29 June 1911, Page 8

COMPLICATED LAND DEAL.

AN INTERESTING JUDGMENT. One June 9 Mr. W. G. Kwirick, S.M., heard, at the Stratford Magistrate's Court, a claim by Kemp and SawJe against James Robinson for commission pn the sale of a property. Mr. Anderson appeared for plaintiffs, and Mr. Weir (Eltliam) for defendant.

After hearing ,the evidence, the S.M. reserved judgment, which was delivered on Thursday. Tho judgment states: Ihis is a claim by the plaintiffs for £6O , commission for work and journeys performed as commission agents in the sale of a certain property and business owned by the defendants, namely a com- '™' "I 11 "' ratc of P" cent - «n t-400. There is no dispute as to the amount of the commission, but the defendant denies having employed the Plaintiffs to sell his business and property. It is proved the following exchange of properties were made and completed namely, Kemp and Perry sold their Te Arena property to James Kenny, and James Kenny sold his property at Omoana to James Robinson, the defendant, and James Robinson sold his property and business at Eltham to S-rV P ° rry - lt is P rovod that the plaintiffs, Kemp and Sawle, had a written authority from Kemp and Perry to sell their Te Aroha property, and the j commission was also agreed on. Robinson the defendant, prior to the above! ™?tM ' ' a<l phvl ' d and subsequently withdrawn his .business and property from a Mr Hodge, i„ whflM h P an °K S^' ? rSal °- Ro in his idence, says Kenny wanted him to buy m (Kenny's place, but ho declined un Robinson further says he told Kenny >o had been looking at Kemp and Per y-s pace at Te Aroha, to would Ilot £«'.«>.. t if K*»y took it he woS tike Kenny's place, M he could dispose of ha place then to Kemp and Perr? After reviewing the evidence at length the Magistrate concludes: I think the Plaintiffs have failed to prove that ]„ fondant Robinson agreed to pay com, «on on the sale of hi s pla ' ce J anTtho evidence does M t proved effee , t«e «le. The solicitors for tL parties woik they have done j„ the whole trans actions was necessary for them r??.„ «lS Z it? tCn r d S f , hnd «*™ts should make a 3s) and costs (£4 &). leL