NEWSPAPER DEAL

Dominion, Volume 24, Issue 147, 18 March 1931, Page 11

NEWSPAPER DEAL

Valuation Dispute APPEAL COURT CASE Umpire’s Decision Queried Contending that a valuation by Sir Thomas Walter Stringer of tbe land and buildings of Sun Newspapers Ltd., Auckland, was made on a principle erroneous in law, New Zealand Newspapers Ltd., a party to an agreement for sale and purchase with Sun Newspapers Ltd., asked in the Appeal Court yesterday that Sir Walter Stringer’s award Tie set aside, or at least remitted back to Sir Walter for reconsideration. When the court adjourned Mr. A. xl. Johnstone, for New Zealand Newspapers Ltd;, had not concluded his address, and the case will be continued this morning. The Chief Justice, Sir Michael Myers, Mr. Justice Reed, Mr. Justice Adams, Mi. Justice Ostler and Mr. Justice Smith arc on tbe Bench. Mr. Johnstone, with him Mr. Rogerson, is representing New Zealand Newspapers Ltd., and Mr. E. 11. Northcroft, with him Mr. P. B. Cooke and Mr. H. J. V. James, appears for bun Newspapers Ltd. The facts outlined to the court were, briefly, that by an agreement for sale and purchase on September 17 last, the Sun Newspapers Ltd. agreed to sell to New Zealand Newspapers Ltd. certain assets of the former company, situated in Auckland. Clauses 1 and 2 provided that the plant, machinery, office equipment, land and buildings were to be purchased at valuation, one valuer to oe appointed by each company, and in the event of any difference of opinion arising it was to be referred to a third valuer, independently appointed by others, whose decision should be final. Umpire Called In. Sun Newspapers appointed Thomas Buddle Arthur, Auckland, and New Zealand Newspapers, Hubert Earle Vaile, Auckland, to act as their respective valuers. Differences of opinion arose as to the value to be placed on land and buildings, and Sir Thomas Walter Stringer, Auckland, was appointed to act as umpire for the purpose of fixing the value. On Noveifiber 20 Sir Walter Stringer gave his decision, fixing the value of the land and buildings at £59, <OO. . On this valuation being received Sir Cecil Leys, managing director of New Zealand Newspapers, Ltd., wrote to Sir Walter Stringer alleging that the assessment had been made on a wrong basis, “with utter disregard of the indisputable facts placed before you, of the Government valuation of the land and buildings, and ol the restriction imposed by tne contract relative to the method of ,ascertaining the value of the premises. Sir Walter Stringer replied on December 5, 1930, stating that he was doubtful as to whether he should reply to Sir Cecil Leys, partly because he (Sir Walter Stringer), in making the valuation, was acting in a quasi judicial position and partly because of the tone of Sir Cecil’s letter. Principles in Writing. However, Sir Walter Stringer said he was willing to put in writing the principles upon which he had made the valuation, and if it was still thought that the valuation was incorrect, he was willing for it to be reviewed by a legal tribunal. New Zealand Newspapers thereupon filed a motion to have the award remitted back to Sir Walter Stringer for reconsideration, upon the ground that he had adopted a principle erroneous m law when making his assessment. At the request of the company Sir Walter Stringer made an affidavit setting out in full the basis upon which he arrived at his award, and the company’s motion was removed to the Court of Appeal for argument. “Exceeded His Jurisdiction.” In the course of lengthy argument submitted to their Honours, Mr. Johnstone, for New Zealand Newspapers, Ltd., held that Sir Walter Stringer had made a valuation he was not asked to make, and therefore had exceeded his jurisdiction. Counsel also contended that even if Sir Walter. Stringer had not exceeded his jurisdiction he had made a mistake of law and therefore the court, under those circumstances, should remit the award to Sir Walter so that he might correct it. a