COURT OF APPEAL.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 19970, 3 July 1930, Page 11

COURT OF APPEAL.

MONEY LENDER'S CLAIM. (PRESS ASSOCIATION TELEGRAM.) WELLINGTON, July 2. The Court of Appeal was engaged today in hearing the appeal of Thomas Eichardson, of Wellington, money lender, from the judgment of Mr Justice Herdman delivered in this case in August last year. . The respondent was Thomas Harris, of Martinborough, farm labourer. Under the will of his father he was entitled (inter alia) to a life interest in the sum of £7250. Respondent's father, Charles Harris, died in January, 1913, and probate of his will was granted in tho following month. On May 15th, 1916, respondent was adjudged bankrupt and the income coming to him from his father's estato was duly paid to tho Official Assignee.

In June, 1918, some of the respondent's creditors expressed dissatisfaction with his position and threatened to sell tho lifo interest in his father's estate, but suggested to respondent that he should himself endeavour to arrango .a loan on this security. Respondent later proceeded to Wellington and interviewed appellant with the purpose of obtaining this loan. Appellant refusod to lend money on the security, - but offered to purchase it, and it was ultimately arranged that he should purchase for £1750. An assignment of the life interest was accordingly executed, and appellant also obtained the benefit of insurance policies on respondent's life, amounting to £2OOO. In 1928, ten years af er.this transaction, respondent issued a writ against appellant alleging that appellant had taken advantage of his pecuniary position and purchased tho life interest for gross undervalue, and asking that the transaction be sot aside. At tho hearing Mr Justice Herdman held that respondent was of weak character and his intelligence not of a high order, that Richardson stood tn a position of superiority towards him, jfod that he had taken an advantago of respondent's pecuniary position. Judgment was accordingly given setting the transaction aside and ordering the appellant to account for tho moneys received by him. Appellant now appeals from this juagm Argument was still proceeding when the Court adjourned until to-morrow. ,