BILL OF SALE

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1354, 29 September 1886, Page 2

BILL OF SALE

Punedin, September 28,

An important judgment in a bill of sale case was given by Judge Williams today. A bill of sale in consideration of £IOO advance was given by one McGallum on 3rd November, and wis registered as a bill of sale and mortgage of stock on 25ih, more than twent -one days after execution. MeCal'utn filed on 9th August following. The deed not baing reg ; stered in time was void against the Assignee, but a subsequent deed to the first was executed on the 24th Apri l , which recited that McOallum was indebted to the mortgagee in £IOD on the first deed. The mortgagee agreed to 'end another £IOO and extend the time of payment of the first £LOO on the mortgagor executing the deed in question, (he stock mentioned in the first deed and other stock being given as aecuri y This deed was registered as a bill of sale and mortgage of stock in proper time. The Assignee contended that the hill was void under the 4th section of the Chattel Securities Amendment Act, as it did not set f< rth a full and true statem nt, etc. The Judge decided that both bills were void as against the Assignee. His Honor also decided that a client who does not employ a solicitor can, it successful, claim ti have counsel’s c'ate treated aa disbursements and allowed.