CLAIM FOR £1144

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 58, 1 December 1934, Page 8

CLAIM FOR £1144

Purchase of a Fruit Farm

THE JURY’S FINDINGS

By Telegraph.—Press Association.

Auckland, November 30.

Allegations that worthless kind near Kaeo had been sold to a London architect in 1930 for the purposes of a fruit farm were the basis of a claim for £1144 damages heard in the Supreme Court. The claim was made by Tom Walter Thornton, farmer, of Matamata, against William Henry Ball, a former director of New Zealand Citrus Plantations Limited. Mr. Thornton agreed to purchase from the company 12J acres for £lO5O, of which he paid £7BO, and he claimed he had been induced to do so by false representations made on behalf of the company by David Rufus Williams. The issues placed before the jury were: Did Williams make any of the representations set out in the claim, and if so were any untrue? Did he make them knowing them to be false and with the intention that plaintiff should act upon them? Was plaintiff induced by any of the representations to buy the property? Was Williams agent for the company in April and Slay, 1930. or was he a sub-agent of defendant? Did defendant know there existed in the literature of the company any of the said representations? Did defendant receive six per cent, in respect of the sale to plaintiff as commission or as remuneration for his general services? Was defendant aware of and did be acquiesce in or adopt any of the representations if found to be false at all material times with knowledge of their falsify or without belief in their truth? What damages, if any, was plaintiff entitled to? After a retirement of two hours, tne jury found on the issues that Williams was an agent of the company and that the payment made to defendant by the company was in the nature of commission. The answer to the remaining issues was in the affirmative. The jury found as fact that plaintiff was entitled to damages as claimed. Counsel for plaintiff and for defendant both moved for judgment. His Honour adjourned the applications until to-morrow. ,when legal argument will be submitted. His Honour will decide after argument whether the finding is for'plaintiff or for defendant.-