SALES OF CARS.

Press, Volume LXVII, Issue 20272, 25 June 1931, Page 6

SALES OF CARS.

+— — CORPORATIONS DIFFER. CASE BEFORE COURT OF APPEAL. (PRESS 4.SSOCIXTION TBLEGHAJt.) WELLINGTON, June 24. The Court of Appeal is hearing the itppeal of General Motors' Acceptance Corporation from the judgment of Mr Justice Ostler in.an action heard in December last in which it was defendant and the Traders' Finance Corporation was plaintiff. In the statement of claim fded by the present respondent in the Court below, it was alleged that on August 28th. 1929, J M. Bishara, trading a's Bishara Bros., Taumarunui, sold a Chevrolet car to W J Young under a hire purchase agreement, and that by a subsequent assignment by way of mortgage executed on the same day, Bishara assigned his interest in the agreement and in the car to the respondent company. Further, on August 17th, 1929, Bishara sold a Pontiac car to one Ueuhou, and on the same day again assigned his interest in the hire purchase agreement under which the car was sold to the respondent company. All duo notices of the assignments were given In Beptember, 1929, the appellant corporation seized the.two cars. Damages to the extent of £272 were claimed for conversion. In the statement of defence respondent stated that the first car had been sold under a hire purchase agreement to S. Bishara, Ltd , Taumarunui. and as the purchase never had been completed the property therein never passed from the appellant company which, therefore, was entitled to seize the car at any time on a breach oi the agreement. As regards the second car it was stated that it had been purchased b. appellant from Bisbara, and in turn sold to one llall under a hire purchase agreement, the car remaining in Bishara's garage and being finally sold by him to Heubeu It* was given in evidence in the IxMver Court that in October, 1927, General Motors, New Zealand, Ltd. had appointed S. BisharH, Ltd its agent in the Taumarunui district, that the company took a lease of a garage, and ran the business for about a month, and then passed it over to J. Bishara, who traded as Bishara Bros. It was run by him for nearly two years. For a time the business was highly successful, but in September, 1929. J'. Bishara was adjudicated a bankrupt. ■ Mr Justice Ostler found that with the concurrence and knowledge of appellant J. Bishara had been put in the position of a .mercantile agent in possession of cars and was allowed to hold himself out to the public as the sole agent of General Motors cars in his district, although the actual appointment had been to S. Bishara, Ltd. Consequently.' by virtue of Section 3 of the Mercantile Law Act, assignments by Bishara were valid and effectual, and the respondent company was entitled to the amount claimed as damages for conversion. An appeal is now brought from that decision and is being heard by his Honour the Chief Justice Sir Michael Myers. .Mr Justice Ilerdman, Mr Justice Macgrcgor. and Mr Justice Kenend v. The Court adjourned till to-morrow.