SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1296, 27 November 1911, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

AN APPEAL DISMISSED. In the Supreme Court on Saturday tho Chief .Tustico (Sir Robert Stout) was enga»cd hearing-tup appeal case of Houghton v. Hall and Co. This was a request that the Court reverse a decision of Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M., delivered at Wellington on March 11, 1911. In the original action, H. J. Hall and Co. sued Edwin Houghton to recover tho sura of i;2O 3s. b'd., alleged to he duo for painting and papering a house, at William Street, Kilbirnie. As a first defence, Houghton said that tho contract sued on was an. entire contract for an entire consideration and as the contract was not completed. Hall and Ca. could not claim for part of it. Without prejudice to this firs' defence, Houghton counter-claimed- for .C2l Bs. Id.', the principal item in this counter-claim being tho estimated co*t of completing the contract in a workmanlike manner. , Tho magistrate, in giving judgment, after remarking that it was shown iu evidence that 'Houghton refused either to accept or appoint an architect to settle tho .matter, • quoted a judgment of Mr. Justice Cooper and declined to accept the first defence. ' His Worship further hel<l that items in tho counter-claim amounting to £i lis. only had been proved, and after deducting this amount from Hall and Co.'s claim, ho gave judgment for Hall and Co. for JilG 9s. Gd. with costs. It was from this decision that tho defendant (ffoiighton) appealed on the ground that it was erroneous in point of law and against the weight of evidence. Mr. A. Dunn appeared for the appellant and Mr. C. ■!!. Dix for the respondents. After hearing legal argument, his Honour dismissed tho appeal with £1 Is. costs.