Untitled

Auckland Star, Volume XXX, Issue 212, 7 September 1899, Page 2

A judgment of considerable import" ance to cycle dealers was given in Wellington yesterday by Mr Haseklen, S.M., in the case of Debeer v. Leydoiri; in which plaintiff sued for £11 4/ on a "hire contract" with respect to a bicycle. Defendant at the hearing pleaded infancy and the Truck Act, but on an < authority quoted on behalf of plaintiff,'.; His Worship has now decided that he / must rule against defendant on the infancy question. As to the second plea plaintiff had contended that the D.I.C. (who were agents for plaintiff) sup::, plied the goods qua the agents of the plaintiff, and not qua the defendant's employer. Mr Leydon was employed at the D.I.C. If this were sound, said His Worship, the whole scope of the Truck Act would be nullified, as all an employer would have to o||j would be to supply his workman with goods not as his employer, but aS agent for some storekeeper. But the Court did not think this was a case of goods supplied. Those "hire contracts" had long been recognised as bailments not as contracts merely for the sale of goods. In the present case a bicycle was lent to a workman, and in terms of the agreement between them the owner of the bicycle could recover possession on an alternative claiip. Therefore His Worship gave judgment for plaintiff for possession, or defendant must pay the value of the article, i; which the Court assesed at £11 4/.' Leave given to appeal.