SUPREME COURT Judgment For $83,966

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32005, 4 June 1969, Page 8

SUPREME COURT Judgment For $83,966

Judgment by consent in favour of W. G. Evans and Company, Ltd, contractors (Mr C. B. Atkinson), for $83,966 against Derek Harold Kemaban, a bankrupt, and Janitor Finance, Ltd, in liquidation, was entered by Mr Justice Wilson in the Supreme Court yesterday. Mr N. W. Williamson, for the Official Assignee, as administrator of Mr Kernahans affairs, and Mr P. G. S. Penlington, for the liquidator of Janitor Finance, Ltd, consented to the judgment, but asked that questions of interest and costs be reserved Before the Court was a writ of summons brought by W. G. Evans and Company, Ltd, as plaintiff. Mr Kemahan was cited as first defendant: the trustees of a trust for the benefit of Mr Kernahan's children (Mr A. Hearn), as second defendant: Janitor Finance, Ltd, as third defendant; Helge Lotz, Ltd (Mr Penlington for the liquidator), as fourth defendant: Potgeiter Properties, Ltd (Mr Williamson), as fifth defendant; South Island Hotels, Ltd, as sixth defendant; J. S. Cox, Ltd, an insurance agency, as seventh defendant; and Canterbury Land Sales. Ltd, a land-sales agency, as eighth defendant. Mr Penlington advised his Honour that he was the solicitor on the record in respect of South Island Hotels, Ltd (in receivership), and J. S. Cox, Ltd, and Canterbury Land Sales, Ltd—which had both been non-ooerative since January, 1965—but had received no instructions from them in the matter. Besides seeking the judgment for $83,966, Mr Atkinson also moved, again with the consent of all counsel, that Walter Arnold Hadlee, a public accountant, he appointed to renort on all sums of money belonging to W. G.

Evans and Company, which had been paid to any of the eight defendants, and the application of those moneys by the latter. The order sought, said Mr Atkinson, would set out the terms of reference of Mr Hadlee’s inquiry, and allow for amendment of W. G. Evans and Company's statement of claim. Mr Atkinson said that the original statement of claim sought an account from all the defendants. “But it became clear that the taking of an account involves the investigation of about 1000 primary transac , tions, and then all thos £ which followed from them, > Mr Atkinson said. “Had yoi A Honour been troubled with * it may have taken weeks, a t j] possibly months, of / ae court's time.” j His Honour, indicating t hat he was prepared to mak<* r the order, asked that a draff £ be submitted for his apprq' va i