Untitled

Thames Star, Volume XVII, Issue 5166, 7 August 1885, Page 2

la the Bankruptcy Court of Appeal held at Leeds on the 16th June, the following case which has some little interest to people in New Zealand was held before Mr Justice Cave and Mr Justice A. L. Smith:—" Ex Parte New Zealand Estate Company (Limited).-—Re S. Grant.—This was an appeal from the Great Grimsby (Lincolnshire) County Court rejecting the proof made by Mr John Redmayne, of Albion street, Leeds, the secretary of the estate company, for the sum of £4469, and whatever might be found to be be due upoa a guarantee. Mr West and Mr W. Blake Odgers appeared for the appellant company ; Mr Cooper Willis, Q.C., and Mr E. J. Parker for the trustee. The facts were shortly these:—ln the early part of 1881 Grant made overtues to Mr Eedmayne and Mr Herring with respect to the sale of an estate in New Zealand known as the Alford Estate for the sum of £54,000, and which he (Grant) was negotiating to purchase, and which he was desirous of selling to a company to be formed for the purpose of carrying it on. Communications were opened with other gentleman, and eventually, upon the faith of the representations made by Mr Grant, a company was formed, which purchased the estate for £54,000. The company waa duly registered as the New Zealand Estate Company (Limited), and Mr Grant was the chairman of that company. It afterwards came to the knowledge' of the company that the whole of the purchase money had not been paid Mr Grant in cash, but that part of the payment consisted of the transfer of an estate in Lincolnshire, and that other misrepresentations had been made by Mr Grant as to the dividend likely to be paid to the shareholders and as to the working expenses of the estate, and after a meeting of the shareholders, Mr Grant. upon being threatened with proceedings for misrepresentation, agreed to sign a guarantee that in the event of no proceedings being taken against him he would guarantee the shareholders interest at 3 per cent, up to a certain date, and 5 per | cent, for a period of 90 years afterwards. In February, 1884, a receiving order was made against Grant, his unsecured debts ! being returned at £7431, fully seenred ! debts at £48,569, and his assets at £10,455. i After the appointment of a trustee the company tendered a proof for £4469, being interest at the rate of 3 per cent., and making a claim for such sum at 5 per cent, as might be found to be due, after crediting all expenses, for a period of 90 years. The trustee rejected the proof on the ground that the Statute of Frauds applied, and that no consideration had been given for the guarantee.—Mr West submitted that tke guarantee was given in respect of a good valid consideration, namely, the alleged misrepresentation and the forbear-. ance on the part of the company ro take proceedings.—Mr Cooper Willis submitted that there was no valid consideration for this guarantee had been given by the company. Upon the second point he submitted that there could be no proof for an unestimated amount. This was not a consideration at all, but the mere bluster of a man who was desirous of selling an estate.—Mr Justice Cave said he thought that the man had better not bluster in writing again.—Mr Cooper Willis submitted that there was no means of ascertaining the liability in the last portion of the proof, and therefore there was no right of proof. It was pointed out that the proof for £1409 was secured by security valued at £GOOQ. —Mr West submitted that sufficient evidence could be given as to the right to prove for the 5 per cent, for 90 years. Before any dividend could be declared there must be a net profit shown upon a balance after all the outgoings had been provided for. The only other question was, whether forbearance by the company was a good consideration. He submitted upon the whole of the authorities that that was a good consideration, when it was remembered that at that time, in Mach, 1880, Mr Grant was the chairman as well as the principal shareholder in the New Zealand Estate Company. At the conclusion of the arguments their lordships reserved judgment, * A certain rich man says of his wealth " This is what I have sighed for, even cried for, and sometimes lied for, and nearly died for; what shonld I let slide for ?"