Skey v. Mutual Life Association of Australasia.
(By Telegraph.—Press Association.) Wkimxqtojj, Tuesday, In the Supreme Court to-day, the action brought by Mr Skcy, Governmint Analyst, as executor in the estate of his son Ernest, to recover from the Mutual Life Association of Australasia, £ISOO, the amount of a policy ou his sou's life. He begun'quarterly payment on a rmcwal policy which Ml duo on October Ist, but young Skcy took advantage of the thirty days' grace, and on Nov. Ist, when asked for payment, he gave a cheque for the amount and requested that the cheque be held until the 10th November. When it was presented and dishonored, he asked for au extension of time until the 15th November. This was granted but tho Company's agent alleges he" told Skey that lus life would not bo covered on the loth of November. Skey was killed _ by a traction engine, and on the following morning, the renewal premium was paid iato a country bank to the Company's credit, but declined by the latter. The question is whether payment by ; & cheque which was dishonored, was a legal payment, The case is proceeding,
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WDT18940619.2.20
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XV, Issue 4751, 19 June 1894, Page 3
Word count
Tapeke kupu
190Skey v. Mutual Life Association of Australasia. Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XV, Issue 4751, 19 June 1894, Page 3
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in