COURT OF APPEAL.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1185, 21 July 1911, Page 3

COURT OF APPEAL.

LITIGATION BETWEEN MERCHANTS. The Court of Appeal, consisting of the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) and Judges Denniston, Edwards, and Sim was engaged all dav yesterday in hearing the appeal, Wm. Henry Nash (Mr. Morrison) v. George and Doughty (Mr. Dalziell). ' Tho appellant had b£en the defendant in an action in the Supreme Court, involving a certain shipment of leather by the steamer lndradcvi, and two promissory notes given by Nash to one Granville Hunt, and discounted for Hunt by the respondents in .tlia present case, who had been the piaiutills in tho Court below. The original case concerned some involved transactions with Hunt,'who left. Wellington soon after they occurred, and was made bankrupt in his absence. Plaintiffs in the Supreme Court (George and Doughty) claimed X37G -Is. 2d. principal and interest due to them ns holders (in diw» course) of two dishonoured promisso-> notes, each for XIS6 13s. 4d. Nash contended that, at the- time that .the. promissory notes were endorsed to George and Doughty, they were givpn by him t.i Hunt, in payment for shipments of j leather 'which Hunt imported in the way of business, and delivered to him (Nash). On July 15, IfilO," George and Doughty, on behalf of Hunt, received the bill of lading in respect of the lndradcvi leather from tho Bank of New South Wales, Wellington, and paid the bills of exchange drawn by the consignors, and D. Nash alleged that George and Doughty knew (when they took up the leather) that it had been sold by Hunt to him (Nash). Nash submitted that George and Doughty were not, in equity, entitled to recoveiyaiid counter-claimed for .£3OO damages, alleging that George and Doughty did not. receive the bill of lading "in "good faith, and that they had wrongfully converted tho shipment to their own use. The allegations of bad faith on the part of George aud Doughty were all denied. His Honour Mr. Justice Cooper, who heard the case in tho Supreme Court, gave judgment for plaintiffs for «C 297 7s. lid. on the claim, and also entered judgment for them on the counlcr-claiin, atid ordered defendant to pay rests, .£5!) 18s. The appeal by Nash was against his Honour's decision. Argument was si ill proceeding when the Court rose for the day.