TAYLOR V. TAVENER.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2071, 12 July 1890, Page 2

TAYLOR V. TAVENER.

Judgment was given by His Honor Mr Justice Dennistoun in this case in Christchurch last Thursday. It was heard in Timaru recently, and will be remembered as one in which the father tried to get possession o£ a section of land from the daughter. His Honor said that up to June 12, 1883, the date of the transfer, defendant had not resided on or improved the land. It was admitted that the plaintiff bad paid all the instalments of purchase money from that date, occupied, cultivated, and improved the land, and that defendant had done nothing to carry out her obligations as a selector. On the expiry of the prescribed term the defendant, despite difficulties raised by the plaintiff, had a certificate of title of the land issued to her. The plaintiff now ashed that the defendant be ordered to execute a memorandum of transfer of the land in bis favor. The defendant had pleaded that the agreement, if made, was void under section 67 of the Land Act, 1877. After referring to several points of law, His Honor said the plaintiff bad not obtained an assignment under the Act. The present application was to enforce an assignment in the equity of the land made, or affected to be made, during the currency of the license Such a claim answered itself. It was absurd to say that these provisions could be treated as mere formalities, and not to be insisted on between the parties, The defendant must have obtained her certificate of title through the ignorance of the Land Board of her default in fulfilling the conditions of her license. Even assuming the origianl bona jides of the application, which was open to some suspicion, what the Court was now asked to give effect to was a distinct and deliberate evasion of the Act The plaintiff was not entitled to the relief he sought. The defendant, however, had set up an unsuccessful plead of fraud. The whole evidence at the trial had been directed to that issue. But for it, the question of law aonld have been raised and settled shortly and Inexpensively. She had also allowed her father to expend money in paying the instalments and improving the land, intending to obtain the benefit of it for himself. He (his Hpnor) did not think she should receive posts. Judgment would be for the defendant without costs.