COURT OF APPEAL

Auckland Star, Volume LIII, Issue 248, 19 October 1922, Page 12

COURT OF APPEAL

I . • DISPUTED LAND DEAL. (By TWegraph -I'ress Association.) i V, KLLIXC.TOX, Wednesday. 'I he Appeal Court hoard argument toda.y in Hie ease, of Erena Pou and (mother v. Mary Ann Xicholson (as executrix of William Bcgg Xicholson), G. B. Sweet, ami Mr. Bcethani. In 1911 plaintiff.-; owned certain land known as Whenuakite. 3 block. According ■to plaintiffs" statement of claim they I wen: induced by hand of William Begg 'Nicholson, or hi? agent, to execute a ' transfer of their lan«!. which, on being duly confirmed by the Native Land iCourt \vn* registered by the district I land registrar; that in ]f>l2 Xicholson, by agreement, sold the land to a syndi irate of which Sweet and Beetham nnd ! Xicholson himself were members, and later executed a memorandum of transi ler to Sweet, and Beetham. and a new I certificate of title '.vas issued to thorn: I that Swe.et and Beetham, the members of the syndicate cither than Kicholson, wp.ri! bona fide purchasers for value. that Nicholson subsequently sold hi? intoicsl in the syndicate, and later died. I The question for the Court was whether, i notwithstanding that the. legal estate j became vested in Beetham and Sweci without notice of fraud, they were, by reason of the partnership or other re[hit ion created by agreement, affected by I notice of fraud of Nicholson and his Loent.

Mr. Ouarlly. of Auckland, appeared for plaintiff, and Sir John Findlay, K.C. (with him Mr. T. N. Holmden) for defendants.

Mr Quartly. for plaintiffs, contended that Beetham and Sweet, being partnerof Nicholson, were tainted with NicholMm".» fraud in acquiring the land: that the agreement between members of the sviidicfttt , showed the relation between them was that of partners.

Sir Jolm Kimllay ffor defpnrlantsi said :ii;rermpnt between member? of tlie synilirate ilid not indit-atp partnership. In Buy case P'.veet and Beotliam liad acquirpi! ;in indefeasible title by registration under Hie Land Transfer Act- of the transfer to them. The Court reserved its decision. TIMBER LAND DISPUTE. Xlio Court concluded hearing yesterday in tli<- C-n«e of the Waimiha Sawmilling Co.. Ltd., versus the 'Waioiie Timber Co.. Ltd.

Mr. Staiitou. in support of the ease for the defendant, said the defendant based his claim lo the land on the judgment of Mr. Justice Sims, removing the caveat wiiic-h prevented dealings with the defendant. The company hftd the right to assume that the caveat Tvas removed to enable the transfer to it to be registered.

After Mr. Skerrett had replied the Court reserved its decision.