SUPREME COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIX, Issue 153, 27 June 1908, Page 6

SUPREME COURT.

TE PUKE HOTEL. PLAINTIFF AWARDED POSSESSION AND £350 DAMAGES. : His Honor -Mr. Justice. Edwards delivered judgment this morning -in the I. case of Ernest Brothers Dufaur v. Tim- . othy Kenealy, Arthur A. Smith, and . Ernest J. R. Smith. This was an action for the recovery of possession of the Te , Poke Hotel, with consequential relief and damages. The hearing of the evi-. dence occupied three days, the argument j r by the counsel on the points of law two ', more days. His Honor's judgment was , f a very lengthy-one, and occupied slightly 1 1 over three-quarters of an hour to read, f To" sum up, said his Honor, in conclnd- ! ing his judgment, the relief which the 11 plaintiff would have in the action was: j (1) Judgment for possession of the hotel and premises; (2) a decree declaring that j ' | the plaintiff was entitled as assignee to the term granted by the lease from the defendant Kenealy to C. A. Martin, and ' ordering Keneary to do' all things necessary to enable the lease and the transfer . to be registered; (3) a decree declaring ; that Kenealy was not entitled to refuse his consent to the transfer of the lease from Martin to the plaintiff, and to a sub-lease from the plaintiff to Adolphtts Montgomery, on the ground that the lease had been forfeited, and that the , transfer of the lease from Martin to' plaintiff might be completed and registered, and that the plaintiff might sublet or sub-lease the hotel to A. Montgomery! without any further consent of Kenealy; (4) judgment against the defendants for £3-50 as damages. The plaintiff must have his costs against the three defendants as on a sum of £1000, according to scale. Mr Reed, one of the-counsel appearing for the defendant*-, asked for a stay of execution as it was' proposed to take the case further. After some argument his Honor allowed a stay of execution with respect to the damages and costs, 14 days being allowed to find security in the event of an appeal. INTERPRETATION OF A WILL. An action was heard last -week for the interpretation of a will which was brought by Charles Murphy, an Anckland medical practitioner, against Patrick O'Reilly and Patrick Brophy, as executors of the will of the late Sarah A. McDowell. The plafrjHff was a j nephew of the deceased, and' the ques- j tion was whether the sum of £100 paid to the plaintiff during the testatrix's ■. lifetime was to be regarded as a gift jor a loan. I His Honor gave judgment for the de- ! fendants, with costs on the lowest scare.