CLAIM AGAINST BUILDER.

Auckland Star, Volume LXII, Issue 148, 25 June 1931, Page 10

CLAIM AGAINST BUILDER.

QUESTION OF LIABILITY. PLAINTIFF IN LIQUIDATIONAn Auckland builder who denied that lie was personally liable for a debt contracted by a company in which he held all except one of the shares, was the defendant in" a claim before Mr. Justice Smith: in the Supreme Court' yesterday. ■ The -claim was brought /by Woolsey Allen, Ltd., recently in business as, timber merchants at Morningside (Mr. Finlay), and the defendant was John Wilkie, builder, joined with JolTn Wilkie, Ltd. (Mr. Dickson). . " " " . !• Mr. Finlay said;the in the lirstplace, was a claim for £745 against JWilkie, Ltd., a company with a capital of £2500. Other, causes of action were the alleged failure of John Wilkie to hand over to the company his trading assets when he iucurrecf additional credit with the plaintiff company; and his alleged misrepresentation that he had made a- complete transfer of his assets.' to John Wilkie, Ltd. , It was also claimed that the* defendant had signed securities which were complete except for one detail, and that the plaintiff was entitled to specific performance. Outlining ihe .case Mr. Finlay said the defendant was one of the plaintiff's customers. In August, 1925, when he was owing £0(32 for supplies of timber, he told' ,the managing director of Woolsey Allen, Ltd., a company 110W in liquidation, that he .proposed to form a . limited liability company, and promised to put his assets into it. In view of the promise the company agreed to transfer the defendant's debt to the new account of the company. Eventually the debt was increased to £745. The plaintiff company then pressed for payment. Defendant's affairs were becoming involved' and plaintiff found that two subcontractors were also seeking amounts due to tliehi. All three met Wilkie at his wife's flat, aild tile sub-contractors were promised security for their debts. Later defendant undertook to give securities for his debts to plaintiff, but plaintiff was surprised to find later that these were in the name of John Wilkie and not of John Wilkie, Ltd. ' The plaintiff gave -evidence, and said, under cross-examination by Mr. Dickson, that he looked for payment of his account to John Wilkie, Ltd. Before calling further evidence, Mr. Finlay said that Mr. Dickson had indicated to him the possibility of a settlement, in , view of an unexpected turn in the case. The hearing was adjourned for a conference between counsel and' was then adjourned sine die.