THE COURTS.

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16308, 4 September 1918, Page 4

THE COURTS.

SUPREME COURT, CIVIL SITTINGS. (Before his Honour Mr Justice Herdman.) The civil sittings were resumed yesterday morning. CLAIM FOR SPECIFIC PjfcUU'ORMAN'OE. ' Legal argument was heard in the action jn winch Jidward Fuilarton Dorman (Mr Beawiek) asked tor specinu performance by George Herman 'lobecK (.Mr F. Wilding, Jv.u., witli him Mr Gresson), of an agreement tor tiia purchase ol certain ituid between bpruigburn and Staveley, the payment of £100 damages; or, alternatively, the payment oi £1760, the second instalment of the purchase money. Mr Wilding said that the defence re. lied on was: (1) False representation, amounting to equitable fraud; (2) innocent misrepresentations; (3) nondisclosure of the latent defect, nameiy,, tho disease; (4) the failure of Rogatski to surrender his lease forthwith;' and (5) the ezce6sive price. The last-men-tioned of itself would not be surticient, but, coupled with all the circumstances was a substantial ground. One of those circumstances was that Tobeck was a man of small intelligence, quite an unfit match for Austin and Dorman in a business transaction of the kind; another was that he (Tobeck) had no independent advice and no agent to advise him- except Austin, who was also agent for Dorman. Replying to his Honour, counsel said that the three main misrepresentations were: (1) That the land was worth £36 per acre, (2) that the land was suitable for wheatgrowing, and (3) that the land was suitable for cattle-grazing and for dairy farming.. Hia Honour, on the question of the value of the land, said that the most impressive fact was that given by R-ogatski in evidence that in seven months h© made a profit of £1000 out ''of the land from dairying, while paying a rental of 35s per acre per annum. Was not that proof that the land was worth £35 per acre? Mr Gresson: Tho rent was 30s per acre for the first' two years. Mr Wilding: That evidence is of a very powerful character until scrutihised. No labour was spent on the land —only £60 in carting hay. His Honour: But you had some ridiculous evidence to the effect that the witness would not take the land at a gift. Mr Wilding referred to what he considered was the peculiar relationship existing between Rogatski and 3>orman as indicated by tho evidence. .His Honour: Is there anything to warrant me in concluding that Rogatski and Dorman entered into a conspiracy to take Tobeck down? a Mr Wilding said that he did not suggest that. He submitted that the abnormal war prices paid for butter-fat could not be regarded as a determining factor in arriving at the fee simple value of the land for all time. It. might bo that the land had produced sufficient to justify an estimate of £35 per acre,' but no prudent man buying land, or a mortgagee lending money on land, would dream of estimating the fee simple value on the prices obtained at a time when abnormal prices prevailed. Counsel submitted calculations and figures to support his contention that the land cost Dorman £20 10s per acre. 1 Mp Beswick did not concur with these calculations. Mr Wilding further contended that in respect to the disease there was a duty imposed on the vendor to disclose to the purchaser that it existed. Mr'Gresson addressed the Court on the submission that if there was no responsibility on tho "vendor to disclose tne existence of the disease, there was a duty imposed on tho vendor to make no_ representation inconsistent with tho existence of that latent defect—the disease. Tho statements made to defendant by- tho vendor, or his agent, inconsistent with the knowledge of the existence of the disease were: (1) That\the land was tho best dairying land in Canterbury; (2) that it was better land for dairying than the Drain road land at Tai Tapu; and (3) that the land was better dairying land than tho land on which defendant was dairying' at Tai Tapu. Mr Beswick said, regarding the surrender of Rogatski's lease, that as the lease was an unregistered one, all that Rogatski possessed was an equitable lease, and ho had signed a document fully surrendering his rights under the lease. The defendant's case was really framed on the allegation that there was fraud by Dorman and Austin ? that is, a fraudulent silence. Plaintiff /denied that there was misrepresentation. If tho opinion expressed that the land was "good dairying land" was held to he a representation, then it was submitted that the representation w.as true, and had been proved to the hilt. As to the disease, its existence did not affect the land as dairying land. In other parts of the Dominion stock had been affected by diseases, but instead of putting the land to some other use, attention had been paid to curing the disease. With reference to the particular disease in the present case, it was submitted that it was not peculiar to the particular piece of land, and was not peculiar to the soil. Counsel cited authorities in support of his submission that was no duty on the vendor to disclose information regarding the disease. As to the value of the land in question, counsel stated that Dorman, for the purposo of an exchange, valued it at £33 10s, which practically represented the price at which he bought it. Mr Gresson briefly replied. His Honour said that he would take tirao to consider his judgment. WARDEN'S COURT JURISDICTION. The Rimu No. 1 Dredging Company, No Liability, a foreign company registered in New South Wales, having a registered office at Hokitika, and carrying on business as a goldminihg company (Mr Puiymond, K.C., with him Mr Park, Hokitika), applied for a writ

of prohibition prohibiting proceeding on a judgment of John Edward Wilson, Warden, in favour of the Dispatch Foundry Company, Grevmouth. The Warden and the Dispatch Foundry wero joined as defendants. | Mr Kitchingham appeared for the Dispatch Foundry Company. , i The question raised was that of the jurisdiction of the Warden's Court, which had given judgment in favour of the Dispateh Company for £230 0s 8d for materia], and labour done for the Rim 11 No. 1 Company. The defence was that the work done by the Dispatch Company was in respoct of the mining operations of tho Rimu No. 1 Company. Mr Raymond addressed the Court at some length on the matter. The further hearing was adjourned till this morning. » MAGISTERIAL. (Before Mr S. E. McCarthy, S.M.) DRUNKENNESS. Four first offenders were each fined os or 24 hours' imprisonment, antVl Henry Cooper (Mr Johnston) was fined" 20s, in default seven days' imprisonment, for,a breach of his prohibition order, and William Henry Poninghaus (Mr Donnelly) was fined £10, in default three months' imprisonment, for a fourth breach. MAINTENANCE. Arthur Sidney Thompson was sentenced to three months imprisonment, in default of payment of arrears on a maintenance order, and a similar course was taken in the case of Charles Riach, who was in arrears on an order for the maintenance of his wife, for whom Mr Cuningham appeared. George Stewart Paterson was sentenced to one month's imprisonment in default of payment of arrears on a maintenance order. Alfred Langley Philip Gibbens (Mr , Sargent) was ordered to pay 5s per week in respect of each of two children in a Receiving Home. Emily Burton Smith (Mr Cuningham) asked for a separation order against her husband, James Henry Smith (Mr Smithson) on the grounds of habitual drunkenness. Tho order was granted, with maintcnanco at the rate of 20s per week. In the case of Theresa Caldwell (Mr Donnelly) v, Hubert Medley Caldwell (Mr Hunter), an application for maintenance, a sine die adjournment was granted, with a proviso that any further hearing should he teken at any time upon seven days' notice. LEGAL AKGOMENT. Legal argument was heard at considerable iuiiytii in too cat© of Quill, and Co. (Mr Wrignt) against the ISew Zealand Shipping Company (Mr Harper), the claim being £47 17s, value of merchandise alleged by tho plaintiffs to be due to them. As stated on the first day of the hearing, the case was by way of being a friend.y onui between the parties for the purpose of securing an interpretation of the statute. The case centred about a cask' of brandy, which was delivered empty, and' for tho contents of which the plaintiffs claimed damages, tho defendants alleging that the contents of'the been pilfered before tho actual cask had been delivered on board the Bhip. After hearing the various arguments and the many authorities! quoted by counsel,, his Worship reserved his decision. Interesting details of the «establish- ■ ment of a lithographic printing press by the Australian Army Headquarters are contained in a recent despatch ro- . ceived by the Commonwealth Minister for. Defence from London. The supply - of large numbers of accurate maps of the enjemy's positions, as well as of our own defensive works is an essential, and a press was built at the corps workshops, the necessary stones, etc., being obtained from Paris: The installation was begun during the German retreat from the Somme in 1917, and was a success from the. start, despits tho difficulties in securing suitable paper apd other printing supplies from time to timo. Its scope has been widened till now a definite prestige has been gained for the work, and the whole thing luis become a show pieco for visitors and for the Americans, who are fitting up their own sections.