WRIGHT-MORGAN CASE.

Auckland Star, Volume LVI, Issue 245, 16 October 1925, Page 5

WRIGHT-MORGAN CASE.

SALE OF PROPERTIES. PROTRACTED LITIGATION. CASE GOES TO PRIVY COUNCIL. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) ASHBURTOX, this day. It is authoritatively stated that the Wright-Morgan case is to be taken to the Privy Council by Mr. D. G. Wright and. trustees (Mrs. H. M. Wright and Hon. W. Nosworthy), as against the judgment of the New Zealand Appeal Court. The necessary payments have been lodged.

The case relates to two properties in the estate of Edward George Wright (who died in 1902) known as Surry HiHg and Windermere. The Supreme Court found that the facts of sales and prices paid was \vell known to all the beneficiaries, and that no question was ever raised until recently, when litigation between Mrs. Morgan (one of the appellants) and Mr. D. G. Wright caused bad feeling. The court then held that the right of purchase was assignable, and that D. G. Wright was legally entitled to buy both estates, but not the stock on either. The Court of Appeal on August 1 allowed an appeal by Morgan and others and Wright and Hon. W. Xosworthy. It was an appeal against the whole of Mr. Justice Reed's judgment, except such part as declared (a) "That the defendant, Douglas George Wright was not entitled to purchase stock on Surry Hills and Windermere: (b) that the purchase of the stock of the said estates had not been condoned by the beneficiaries, nor had they acquiesced in the sale; and (c) excepting such part of the judgment as orders that inquiries should be made and accounts taken before the Registrar and accountant, as to whether the rate of interest payable between 1908 and 1924 by Douglas George Wright to the trustees was a proper rate, and (d) whether the securities now held by the trustees are in order, and whether'they are good and sufficient securities as required by the Trustee Act, 1908." Mr. Myers, in opening the case for the applicants, said there would be a slight alteration, in the case as previously presented. Judge Beed had accepted the Hon. Nosworthy's statement as to the valuation of Windermere without snpporting evidence. They alleged that the trustees had been allowed to purchase the property at the lowest possible valuation at a profit of £50,000. Although the land ami stock of Windermere and Surry Hills were purchased for £03.184 all'the cash actually found by Douglas Wrisrht was the paltry sum of £800, and the only person considered in the transaction was Douglas Wright, whose interest was adverse to the trust estate. Mr. Myers then proceeded to discuss figures and respective purchases at srreat length, statine that a total profit that appeared to be made on both properties was £01,35G sterling.

The Chief Justice, in. dissenting from the judgment, lipid that the appeal should bo dismissed on the ground that there had been a delay of sixteen years in bringing tfie action, and that it would be inequitable to Douglas Wright to irive up properties or account for profits from re-sales.