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

A RACING CASE.

LEASE OF A HORSE. {By Telegraph—Fress Association.) i"" INVERiOARGILL, Last. Night. At the Supreme Court before Mr Joshua Williams, David Andrew Mitchell sued the executors in the estate of John Beck (deceased) for £285 10s. Beck was the owner of the racehorse Magdala and entered into an agreement with plaintiff to lease the horse to him for the Grand National meeting in 1912, on condition that plaintiff paid all fees, including training expenses and gave Beck one half of any stakes won. Magdala won the Winter Cup and Beck received £SOO, less £l4 10s riding fees. Beck had since died, but prior to death he had filed a statement of defence, alleging that plaintiff had not carried out all the conditions, among which was a Vferbal agreement to put £lO on the horse if Beck had not returned to the Dominion in time to invest that sum. Beck arrived at the Bluff on Monday and the race was run on Tuesday. Counsel for the Executors argued that -the transaction ca*ne within section 71 of the Gaming Act,. «nd that no action could be maintained for the money won by way of stakes relating to a horse-raco. Anything arising out of an unenforceable contract was also unforceable. Counsel for plaintiff contended that section 71 applied to monies held by the stakeholder, and that the court would not assist a fraud, where a reasonable interpretation of the statutes would obviate it. His Honour said that Mitchell had fulfilled the conditions which he was to perform, and he did not think the agreement wwats t invalid. Plaintiff was hot suing for money on a horse race and not paid, tm-fc for money vi'liich had been won and paid to Beck, who was bound to account for it. Section 71 of the Act applied only where money was won by a "horse race, and not paid to ih© winner. If the section applied in this case, it would be an illegal thing for two persons to own a horse jointly and .share its winnings. Judggiven for plaintiff with costs.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAG19130905.2.24.18

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXV, Issue 10713, 5 September 1913, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
348

A RACING CASE. Wairarapa Age, Volume XXV, Issue 10713, 5 September 1913, Page 5

A RACING CASE. Wairarapa Age, Volume XXV, Issue 10713, 5 September 1913, Page 5

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