THE COURTS.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18186, 24 September 1924, Page 5

THE COURTS.

SUPREME COURT.

fUjio' o his Honour Mr Justice Sim.l A PROPERTY DEAL. r«n*ro Smith, Christchurch, railwav cm- ■" £z?'gae& George C. Clarke, Chrialclvtircn, of Lane, Walker, and lludkin, Montreal 6trcct, for specific performance, /asked for an °rder that Clarke should tS Z v k transfer and possession of a property fjeg Simeon street, Spreydon, for £2IOO. •Vfpjoperty consisU of a, house and two rail one rood and eight perches of land. - «w»s »HeS c d hy Smith that Clarke agreed .■ V«« the property, under an agreement { ?J2on April 12th last, through Mr H. rWviugstone. Clarke paid £IOO depoeit, S,'t f»iled to complete the purchase. ■porta ß defence it was stated that if de*«Sant entered into the agreement, which I denied, its terms were so uncertain that •t*Tra« unenforceable, and that it was a linditito, beforo defendant paid the balance » the purchase money, that ho should sell Vi TtfOpertv at 03 Hackthomo road, Cash«re within two rnonth3 from the date of fha aiicged. contract, and it had not been "lir E Vf. "White rrppearrd for Smith and Mr CI S. Thomas for Clarke. The plaintiff, in evidence, said that the mooerty was in Mr Livingstone's CJgg for sale by auction, at £2300, but an fffer at £2IOO was made, and witness agreed to accept it. Later on Clarke said that ho „jul,j not complete, as his wife was in an state, and did not want to part «jth the home on the hills. To Mr Thomas: Clarke first said that he would he able to finance the purchase, and ♦jut if he sold his Hackthorne road probe would get £I3OO over tho mortgages ST it. and a quick sale.. Witness did not know that the Hackthorne road property wouMi come into the deal with his property. He did not know how Clarke would finance Aa purchase of witness's property. There TCS no auction sale of the property. Clarke did not eay that he must sell the Hackthoroe road property before he bought witnets's- . . Jtenxv G-- land said {Jpt Clarke went to him and said tha.t ho vfebed to huy the property. Ho asked if witness coujd finance a loan on Clarke's jkefcthome road properly to purchase tho Siineon street property. Witness Baid that it thought that about £IBOO could bo got for the Hackthorne road property, and Clarke said that he wanted £2OOO Later, CJjrke offered £2IOO for the Simeon street (pjoperty. Witness arranged, terms ou the bisis of » deal at that price. In a bcc--o*4 contract it was agreed that the bilMjce of the purchase money should bo paid <jn the salo of Clarke's Hackthorne road proByty. which was to be sold within two Bicnths, but it was agreed th.-vt at tho end of that time Smith must have hi 3 money. ' Clarke cried off the deal, on tho ground thit the doctor said that his v.-ifo should act lewe the hills. Clarko said that tho Hetbodist Church people were interested in the Simeon street property, and asked vit- . nc!3 to make a doal of it. To'Mr White: Clarke knew quite well tint the nrrangemente for finance stood whether the Hackthomo road property was told or not. . Balph Lockwood, foreman machinist, employed by Booth, 2Jacdonald and Co., said th*fc tha committee of the Methodist Clruvoa, lad discussed buying the Simeon street p'.o- ---' perty, Clarke saying that he had bought it, tad would sell it to the Church for £2200, ' but he was unable to complete owing to Lis

-wife's health. I Ketoetli M. GreS3on, coliL-ifor, said Ihr.t Citric said tint lie wanted two months fiom ilia daU of the contract, for the sn!e of the Hickthorne road property. ' Evidence was also given for plaintiff by W;!liam H. Down. Mr Thomas said the contract was ambiguous. ' Clarke w*s not in a position to complete. The contract was entered into on tijataia that the Hackthornc property was I told. In'evidence, Clarke said lie had no means auajt from the propertv at liacMhorne road. He informed Mr Livings to n-e that lie did not desire to have two proncrties, as. he did xot want to have one round his neck. The etcowl contract entered into bv him etipu]B that his property in Hackthornc road Bad to he sold within two months. If the saeewaß not sold within that time, the contract to purchase the other property was to ■be void. To Mr "White: He took the. eaJe hoard' .Gown from his prot>erty himself because the i <llehb of it upset his wife. Ho had never I told"anyone that he had bought Smith's hut could not complete the ptirchase. ■Ha'wonld p.dmit that ho had asked for two extension of tho contract fronx the j <]6te of its crrirr. j , - E}ue Jane Clarke, wife of defendant, said j tint after Mr Livingstone had viewed the l>oUSe'and had a. talk about it with her fijljband and 1 herself, ho expressed the opintjSa. that he would have no difficulty in Tb inpplv £7OO io her liu/sband at 6 per hut the latter would not accept it. & eiving his decision, hi 3 Honour said itkt tbo defence set up was that the defend|iat|was not to be hound by tlir contract unlesa the propertv was sold, but the contradicted this, and tho defendS&t;:had failed to establish, his case. The sStfenre was really an attempt io contra-, tho leal terms of the contract and alter renditions it imposed. The position was atirf the defendant had into a contfjcfc and wps bound to pay the tmrclwse iittoßey wiMiin three months after the agrecIMent.*' The defendant ws? wholly at fault jifcre4T»ct of thfi matter. His Honour would |#tßJrdingly make a decree for specific perJgjaancc of the contract, vith cost? on tho jraitlißVUm costs a.nd disbursements pong fixed by the Registrar. g? f\ MAGISTERIAL. la' ji . 1..' TUESDAY. lr t (Before Mr Wyvern "Wilson, S.M.) % Wj DRUNKENNESS. 'ijA first lender was convicied and fined ss, fuj default 24 hours' imprisonment. Igf, YOUNG "WOMAN'S THEFT. Adelaide Wilson, aged 21 years, gljilty to the theft of £'6 from Mary gpJi .Garland. SjChief-Dctectiye Gibson 6aid the woman stolen the money from an aunt with jhflWnt ehe was living. She had burnt tho notes, after having been spoken to by If* "She is not quite right," he sj?'?* "She sometimes goes away for a few SBifS and sleeps out." Igylo Magistrate: Another case for the rc©{■taative home that docs not exist, pi Accused was admitted to probation, for 12 on condition that she remained in Army . Home. Ilglv; "WITH TWO "WIVES." Hewitt (Mr M. J. Burns) was with being £379 10s in arrears in payment of maintenance to iiis wife children in England. It appearhe also had a "wife" and two chil|l|® in New Zealand. Burns intimated that Hewitt was ||ipiflg to pay the current order of 15s a and pay 5a a week ofE tho arrears. ijsffc.P. Jones, maintenance officer, said an |gg«f was made against tho defendant at |og l ' i Wstle-on-Tyne, England, in 1909, tor jgjm tt week. Arrears now amounted to £379 |§P®" Defendant was earning £5 a week as ||Rfil_lgr, ■ He had contracted a bigramoua in New Zealand, and had two here. He did not know whether defendant would cor sent to the proIgljP®', order. Defendant hadi thrco children the arrears at 5s a weok. Magistrate thought the man could Sli|fe , -:jE3 a week towards tho support of his fiiijjjMi wife and children. said he had averaged only £3 jfßjjgfeadaiit was sentenced to two months the warrant to bo suspended ,nfe as he paid 15s a week current inainMAINTENANCE. Liater (Mr M. J. Burns) pro•mW against Edmond Harry Robert Lister -S. E. McCarthy) for separation orders on the ground of failg* maintain. The separation was c»nWpij .to. ISr Burns said tho defendant, -fCr® - Was an habitual inebriate, was a rejffyw man receiving £3 a week from The Magistrate mado the orders <®|&6d maintenance at £1 per week. order, was convicted and to ono month's imprisonment, tho ISSS'SRt to he suspended so Jong as ho pays mmkvoik os arrears. la Roach was ordered to pay at the rate of 20s a week, gißjPjjfr'* week for the maintenance of his |§S«?P*k)dreiL Separation and guardianship tlso made against him. Gurdler was ordered to Week, and David Gurdler 5s a the maintenance of their Gurdler. An application for •CaiMt another son, Henry GuraMr M. J. Buras reprcthree WgssßS&foi Harriett Cameron proceedcu Cameron for separation, guardianship orders on th& lailare to maintain. °id crs

were made and maintenance was fixed at 30s per week. Rosio Ann Adams (Mr S. F<|. McCarthy) claimed maintenance from Bessie Glacier (Mr J. 33. Batchclor), for having supported a child of the defendant. Mr McCarthy said complainant and defendant ■were sisters. Mrs Adams had received nothing for the child's upkeep, and now when the defendant demanded the child, complainant would not give him up. The case was adjourned for a week in order that the child might be given back to its mother. (Beforo Mr H. Y. "\7iddowson, S.M.) PIG- HUNTERS SUED. Sir Charles Campbell, sheep farmer, of Davaar, blonyhurst (Mr D. K Wankiynj, claimed from Lionel Denton, formerly a hotel.ttcper, of 78 George- street, New Brighton (Mr W. 1\ Tracy;, tho sum of £2O as damages for trespass.. The statement of claim • stated that tno detendant on June 30th wrongfully brake and entered upon Da>aar, in company with other persons. Tho circumstances of such breaking and entry amounted to '"an aggravated and insulting defiance of the rights of the plaintiff " "in tha*- on a previous occasion, tho defendant had been warned not U> trespass en tho land. Plaintiff claimed a similar penalty from Joseph McFadden, of Walter's road, Marshall' Charles Campbell said ho had turned Denton off tho property ouce and prosecuted him. His eheoherd had no authority to <r-\o permission to anybody to live in a hut on the property. Tho effect of men being in tie but and dogs bemg there wis that the sheep were driven from tho flat land to tie tops of the hills, fiacre th To S Mr T Tracy witness said ho was sure tho men had not permission to shoo. on Si? George Clifford's ground, as counsel al Loms Campbell, sheep fanner, of Happy TaPey said that on Juno 19th he eaw three men and dop at the hut ™cy «ud they wi nermission to live at the hut. ■KormaT Campbell, sheep farmer of Motu- ™, "id U« carrying capacity of the and l-dbcen decreased by sheeting Parties Thomas Hayes, shepherd, at Davaar sad Thomas a j mon shmtc& l 0 * „,ross *%uUv and asked for pennislum across a to uu. h Sard, and it was sometimes used by tho TOS 4r contended that there wis no Air iwy , rc trespassing on evidence *ft* * e e^*C n ?n the* road and STc r - hS UThe hut belonged to the *£**»*••* shall have to hold that there is evidence. hat H men permission to sleep at Sf-STtSt hj?d P cnly shot at Clifford's id that told fern fe could use tho hut as iar as he k To" Mr Wanklyn: The party had five „ w thev were ail chained up at the tt Winess y »£ sure he had not «usSersuU Hayes. were shot on Clif .aid a roadman had given him permission to use the hut solved itself into a -at without costs.