SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 477, 8 April 1909, Page 11

SUPREME COURT.

A PROPERTY TRANSACTION. " CLAIM FOR COMMISSION. Judgment with regard to tho case of Henry Adam Mackay, frozen meat and produce broker and land and estate agent, versus Charles Freeling Beeves, settler, Pohokura, was delivered by Mr. Justice Cooper yesterday. Tho facts in this case wore, briefly, as follow.—Plaintiff claimed that he had ott'ected an exchange of defendant's farm, comprising 3846 acres in Ngatimaru Survey District, for Joseph L. F. Rollet's Arcadia Hotel and other properties in Wellington.. The amount of the commission agreed upon, viz., £250, hatl not boon paid to him. Defendant stated that, at tho time of tho negotiations, plaintiff was a clerk'in the omploy of H. E. Leighton, land agent, who had made a claim for commission, as also had Lerien, Shallerass and Co. Plaintiff introduced Rollat to him with a "now to effecting an oxchango of tho properties. Subsequently defendant found that certain statements of fact made b,y Rollet to him, which ho relied on as material to tho subject matter of the proposed exchange, wero entirely erroneous. It was found that the mortgage on one of Rollet's properties was to securo £2050 instead of £SOOO,- and that the hotel was. not a paying concern. Tho negotiations were then terminated by the refund to Rollet of £100 paid by him on account of moneys payablo as equality of exchange. His Honour gavo judgment for plaintiff for tho amount claimed, with costs in the middle scale- and allowance for second counsel. ,Mr. Skerrett, K.C. (with him Mr. S. A. Atkinson), appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. Hordman for defendant. • FOOTBALL PROGRAMME RIGHTS. CLAIM AGAINST N.Z.R.U. UPHELD. Another caso in which judgment was given yesterday by. Mr. Justice Cooper was that in which Sydney A. Watson of the Imperial Advertising Agency, was plaintiff, and the N.Z. Rugby Union were the defendants. This was a claim for £375 for alleged breach of contract. Defendants sold plaintiff tho right to publish tho official programme in connection with tho Anglo-Welsh tour for £52 10s., together with 7} per cent, of the sales, tho amount. accruing from tho percentage not to bo less than £30. It was provided, inter alia,.that defendants should use their best endeavours to assist plaintiff in his undertaking, and should freely afford all available official information in regard to tho players and officials in each mateh that might bo required by plaintiff, but, nevertheless, that the defendants should have no liability snould any opposition programme be published. According to plaintiff, the defendants wrongfully supplied to tho press and to tho public the names, and in some cases, the field numbers of players; the defendants re- | to alter tho numbers on the' jerseys before each match, although plaintiff offered to supply tho numbers; and the defendants refused _or neglected to supply to plaintiff officjal information in- regard to players and officials in'certain matches in sufficient time to enable him to issue the official programme. Defendants denied that they had undertaken to give the information solely to plaintiff. They counter-claimed for the sum of £30, percentage: on sales, stipulated in the contract. ' , . .

His Honour said that no information as to names or numbers of the players was given to tho press prior to the first three matches''of■'the-'tour; As a result , of the withholding of the information articles appeared in different newspapers, in which some very . uncomplimentary remarks were made relative to defendants. Upon Juno 4, 1908, the defendants-resolved: ''That a telegram bo forwarded to tho manager of the visiting team asking' him to permit. tho local press to have the names of teams at tho earliest possible moment." Throughout the rest of tho tour tho names of tho players appeared to have been given to tho press with the consent of defendants, ,and published on the morning of each match. In'some instances the numbers of the British players were, also given, but there was no evidence that that was dono with the consent of defendants. Plaintiff made some endeavour to have different numbers assigned to individual players for each- match', but; so far as tho British team was concerned without success. There was, his Honour continued, no reason to doubt the truthfulness of tho assertion of the secretary to tho union that, at the outset of the.'tour/' it/was, arranged between him and plaintiff that the numbers of the players should be the same throughout, tho tour. It was obvious then that once the names were given. and published in the press tho identity of the players upon the field be very easily ascertained, and that tho giving : pf the names' to the press for publication on the morning of the match would materially affect the sale of official programmes: As the .names were jtfven to the press npon\;the authority of defendants the question was whether it constituted a breach 'of Contract. The defendants justified their action upon the ground that it would liavo been unreasonable to withhold the information from the'noswpapers. So it would have been from the point of view of tho press and the public. But as regards plaintiff, defendants had contracted to do its best to assist him .in making the sale of the programmes a; success. If the defendants had intended to'have reserved a right to give information to the press, this reservation should have been stated in the agreement. There was a breach of the agreement, and the result was an immediate diminution in the sale of the programmes. None of the other alleged breaches had, in tho opinion of the Court, been established. Plaintiff estimated that he would have sold 50,000 programmes instead off , 15,000 'as was the case. It was impossiblo.to definitely estimato what number would have been sold had the agreement been carried?,;out. A fair estimato would be one to oTCTy soven spectators at the various matches. , '.

HislHonour held that plaintiff had, through the breach of the agreement, lost the sale of 10,000 copies, and, estimating the profit at 3d. a copy, that would amount to £125. Froih that sum the percentage duo to defendants, viz., £39, had to bo deducted. The claim and counter-claim would be treated as one ' proceeding. Judgment would be given for plaintiff for £86, with costs on the lower scale, and an allowance of 15 guineas for-an oxtra day, and 5 guineas for second counsel. Jio costs would bo allowed on the counterclaim. Mr. Ostler, with him Mr. Mackenzie, appeared on behalf of plaintiff, ami Mr." Skerrott, with him Mr. Morison, for defendants. (JVIAQISTRATE'3 COURT. (Before • Mr. W. G. Hiddell, S.M.) A FAMILY QUAEEEL. Charles M'Anally pleaded not guilty to a charge of having unlawfully assaulted his wife, Florence M'Anally. Accused's wifo stated that on the night of April 3 her husband came home about 9 p.m. He had had a fen- drinks, and' a family quarrel occurred between him and witness, but accused did not hurt her. After ■ evidence by Constables Mahoncy, Quayle, and M'Carthy, accused, on oath, admitted that there had been a family quarrel between him and his wife. The wife broke a window and ran put into the street screaming. Witness tried to get her in beforo a crowd gathered, but slio lost her head, nml made the allegation about him.' Witness had only had three long shandies between 1.30 p.m and 9 p.m. His Worship said tho evidence was against defendant, and probably if he had had less liquor the affair would never have happened. A conviction and fine of £3, in default 21 days' imprisonment would bo entered, seven days bcin" allowed within which to pay tho fine. ALLEGED FOHGSRY AND UTTERING. Alfred Brewer, alias Anderson, appeared on a charge of having, on March 2, at To Awamutu forged the name of Wm. Hudson, of Kio Kio' to a cheque for and having uttered tho same to James Bathurst. On tho application of Chief-Detective Broborg, accused was remanded to appear at To Awamutu on Wednesday next.' Bail-was allowed in the sum o£ ,£SO and two sureties of .£25 each. ALLEGED THEFT OF CHEQUES AND MONEY. Frederick Armitnge was further remanded to Wednesday next on a chargo of having on April 1 at Wellington committed theft of eevet

cheques of a total vnluo of ,£39 Bs. nnd ii\o J!1 notes from tho person of John Nelson: Bali was allowed in the sum of £W0 and two sureties of £50 each. Sir. O'Leary appeared for accused. ~ Armitago was also charged with having driven a vehicle in Jervois Quay on. the night of March 31 without a light, and was convicted and fined 20s. and costs 7s. OTHER CASES."' : Doris Armitago pleaded guilty to a charge of importuning, and was fined £2, in default ssven days' imprisonment. A young man named Ojeorgo Riddolls, who stated that ho had only just arrived in Wellington by tho Ruapehu, pleaded guilty to a charge of indecency on the Queen's wharf, and was convicted and fined £5, with the alternativo of 14 days' imprisonment. . Isidore Jncobns was fined on n 'Dirge of indecency in Manners Street, llr. Cook appeare.'. for accused. One first offender for insobriety was c. nvicted and discharged. JUVENILE COURT. ANOTHER BIRCHING ORDERED. Two juvenile offenders, one aged 17 nnd the other 16, were brought before Mr. Riddell, S.M., on a charge of having, on March 12, at Wellington, committed theft of 25 race-card books, the property of the "New Zealand Times" Co. One of the boys pleaded guilty, and was convicted, and ordered to come up {or sentence when called on, and to pay 14s. the value of the books stolen. The other lad, who entered a plea of not guilty, was convicted and ordered to come up for' sentence when called on, and was ordered to receive six strokes of the birch. An order was also made that 7s. found on him be returned to the owner. CIVIL BUSINESS.. (Before Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M.) A QUESTION OF ACCOUNTS. A question of accounts was involved in a case in which Herbert L. Pratt, grocer (Mr Blair) sued George L Lay, grocer (Mr. len), for £2i 195.. 5d., balance alleged to be due for goods sold and delivered and cash advanced. Lay also claimed .£l9 10s. Id. from Pratt for goods supplied, and the grazing of two horses. The cases were practically an arrangement of the accounts between the parties. After a partial hearing they were adjourned sine die to allow the books of the parties to be examined by an accountant, ana the accounts to be adjusted. ENFORCEMENT OP AWARDS. batch of enforcement of award cases was dealt with at the Court yesterday by Dr. A M Arthur, S.M In the first case called Joseph Jamieson was charged with an alleged breach of the Builders', Labourers' Award, bv employing a non-unionist named W. Morrell' en m,nKfi ry i V T m , mbers , o£ union, equ'allv S ! fi° do . th \™*> wre unemployed and on the union books. Mr. W. Newton Inspector of Awards, prosecuted, and Mr. Peacock appeared for defendant. After hearlne evidence and certain legal argument" whether defendant came under the award his Worship reserved his decision to April 15 J. Staples and Co., Ltd. (Mr. B&r), were charged with a breach of the Painters' Award n that they employed a maltster named M'Mil. Lan for the purpose of doing certain naint W work, about 20 ho™ in two weeL. P Decision was also reserved until April 15 in thi* case also in the case of M'MiUan charged less than the union rate of The Wellington Gas Co. was charged with ion of a building as builders' labourers when there were a number of names of "nfon'iste oS toX& i T 5 ment Jyc,gmcilt ™™°d