IN BANCO.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 2631, 5 August 1908, Page 2

IN BANCO.

QUESTION OF CONTRACT. ' APPEAL DISMISSED. Argument was heard before Mr. Justice Cooper yesterday in the case of Jacob Compton, of Fcrnridge (appellant), v. Henry Evans, of Fcrnridge, and Benjamin RicharS Rayner, of Waingawa (respondents). . . This was an appeal from a decision of Mr'. James, S.M., who gave judgment for Evans and Rayner in an action against Compton for £50 damages for breach of contract, whereby Compton agreed to cut and grub certain gorse for the sum of £100, plus 10 per cc;nt., when Evans sold the property. Evans disposed of the property to Rayner, and Compton declined to .perform :the work. legal de-. fences which he. set' up includeil''tlie defences' that the contract was subject .to a condition ; not expressed in tho document itself, that'.if the land were sold the work was not to bo done. '. '

His 1 Honour, 1 in delivering that he was unable to say the Magistrate's decision was;wrong.' The appeal would,' therefore, be dismissed with 10 guineas costs. Mr. Hollings (Palmerston North) appeared on behalf -of 'the appellant, and Mr. Myers for the respondents. , CLAIM FOR COMMISSION'. ' ' ' ' POWERS OF AN AGENT. ' The case of David Morris Owens-, contrae« tor (appellant), v. John Caleb Trickett, land' agent (respondent), was taken by Mr. Justice Cooper yesterday: The facts in this case were, briefly, as follow: —In the Court below, before Dr. M'Arthur, S.M., judgment had been given for Trickett for the sum of £56 os., being' the amount of his claim for the work, trouble, and attendance performed and done' for Owens, at lfis request, as a commission agent, in January,' 1906; in connection with the sale of certain land and premises situated at'Maaram'a . Crescent, which was the ' property of Owens, this : sum being the amount of commission at the rate of £2 10s. per cent. ■on £2250,. which was the. selling price of the property in question. This property had passed from a man named Pearco . to Owens, and-it appeared tliat Trickett had ; acted as agent for both parties to the trans- 1 action. It was stated that lie had disclosed to Pearce.that lie was charging Owens a commission, and that he received £30 commission from Pearcc, but did not disclose the fact to Owens. , .

The appeal was brought on points of. law arid of fact.. The main question was.whe-' ther an agent for both parties on an exchange could charge either commission without disclosing the fact to the other. His Honour said the point was a very important' one, and he would therefore reserve his decision. Mr. Dunn appeared for the appellant, and Mr. Myers for the respondent. - " A PAKAPOO CASE. • APPEAL AGAINST - CONVICTION. Argument relative to' the caso of Joe Gea, of 59 .Taranaki Street (appellant), versus Detective Williams (respondent) was heard be-, fore Mr. Justice Copper yesterday. Mr. T. Mi AYilford (with him Mr. O'Leary) appeared for appellant, and Mr. Myers..for the resooudent. - . - '

On Aprils, ■ the. appellant was convicted ofhaving sold certain pakapoo tickets, and finqd £100, with £2 13s. costs. , : The appeal was brought to quash the conviction on the grounds:— (1) Of "want of certainty," as the conviction was.on a different .matter from that set out in the information. , '

(2) That it did not state or specify the person to whom the ticket it referred to was sold, and did not specify which,of the ticketß in regard to which evidence was .given tho conviction referred to. ■ 'v. Decision was reserved.