AN INVOLVED CASE

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XLV, Issue 10168, 25 July 1924, Page 4

AN INVOLVED CASE

ECHO OF BANKRUPTCY. THE METHVEN DISPUTE. JUDGMENT AGAINST WIGHTMAN Reserved judgment was delivered by Mr E. D. Mosley, S.M., this morning in the case the Deputy-Official Assignee v. Wightman and Hardie. The facta brought out in the recent hearing were that the Deputy-Official Assignee, acting in the bankrupt estate of A. M. Bremner, claimed £94 being balance of money due under a contract under which Bremner built a hulk store at the cost of £l4O, and extras valued at £l4 10s, under instructions from Wightman. Tho amount now due and owing was £94 10s. The evidence showed that money had been received ! on account from Hardie, but Bremner- ] alleged this had been paid by Hardie, ' as agent for Wightman. | 'The Magistrate said . that in this ; matter the facts were very much in- ! volved indeed, and showed without a j doubt that defendants were very unbusinesslike in the keeping of accounts, and really had no idea where they stood in regard to their legal liabilities; The matter had been placed before the Court with the object of getting a decision regarding the liability .of the parties. Some of the voluminous evidence was not satisfactory, hut no reflection was cast on the DeputyOfficial Assignee. From the dross the Magistrate had gleaned the followingfacts of which lie was satisfied: —That' the defendant Hardie persuaded' Wightman to agree to the building of the store. The defendants both gave instructions to Bremner regarding the building. Wightman agreed to pay for the erection of the building. The contractors for Bremner had consulted Wightman on several occasions regarding the building. Bremner looked to Wightman to pay for the work. TheMagistrate was of the opinion that Hardie’s connection with the building was merely as an agent. Judgment was given against the defendant Wightman for the amount claimed (£94 10s), with costs £l4 7s (Court £3 7s 6d, witnesses’ expenses £5 os, solicitor’s fee £5 14s 6d).~ The plaintiff was non-suited against the defendant Hardie, and £2 2s costa allowed to the defendant Hardie as against the defendant Wightman.