Apple Sales Charges Dismissed
(N.Z. Press Association) AUCKLAND, Nov. 5. The Apple and Pear Marketing Regulations (1949) had been designed to create a monopoly for the Apple and Pear Board, Mr C. G. Pottinger told the Magistrate’s Court today when prosecuting a New Lynn fruit grower, A. A. Sunde, Ltd., and fruit retailer, Foodtown Supermarkets, Ltd., which faced charges under the regulations.
The grower, represented by Mr S. C. Ensor, pleaded not
guilty to attempting to sell Granny Smith apples to a purchaser other than the board. The retailer, represented by Mr J. B. Sinclair, denied aiding and abetting. After hearing prosecution evidence and submissions from counsel, Mr E. F. Rothwell, SJff., dismissed the charge against Sunde, Ltd., on the grounds of insufficient proof. Mr Pottinger offered no evidence on the abetting charge and this also was dismissed.
The regulations forbid growers to sell apples or pears to any purchaser but the board—unless the sale is made direct to consumers.
Mr Pottinger said newspaper advertisements had invited customers to call at a Foodtown supermarket to arrange purchase of cases of apples. The supermarket
would provide envelopes addressed to Sunde, Dtd., and customers would be told to post these, with their cheque, to receive the apples. The attempted sale charge was laid before the board knew of an actual sale by this method, but he did not wish to amend the charge. Mr Pottinger submitted that, though deliveries were made direct to consumers, the actual sale was not direct, as the supermarkets had acted as agents. Mr Ensor said that there was no evidence to show that Sunde, Ltd., had had anything to do with the insertion of the advertisement
The Magistrate: It is perhaps unfortunate for the board, but the point it desires to be resolved will not be decided here as I do not arrive as far as that point. "Mr Pottinger invites me to
deduce that the advertisement was placed at the instigation of the grower. "This is a quasi-criminal matter and the normal rules of proof apply. The whole substance of the dispute will have to be decided at a later hearing.”
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19651106.2.49
Bibliographic details
Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30901, 6 November 1965, Page 3
Word Count
355Apple Sales Charges Dismissed Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30901, 6 November 1965, Page 3
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Press. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Acknowledgements
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Christchurch City Libraries.