SALE OF A MOTOR LORRY

Evening Post, Volume XC, Issue 70, 20 September 1915, Page 2

SALE OF A MOTOR LORRY

CASE IN THE SUPREME COURT. Matters relating to a motor^orrytransaction were investigated by His Honour Mr. Justice Chapman in the Supreme Court to-day. The case was that of Ernest Henry Spackman, of Masterton, carrier, plaintiff, v. George W. Woods, of Invercargill, motor importer, and John Edward Fitzgerald, of Wellington, importer, defendants. Mr. W. Perry appeared for the plaintiff, Mr. T. Neave for defendant Woods, and Mr. A. W. : Blair for defendant Fitzg-erald. The statement of cla»n set out that on or about 31st October, 1914, plaintiff was shown by Fitzgerald, who professed to act as agent for Woods, a chassis or motor-lorry, which he represented to be a "33-h.p. Argyll chassis to carry 2 tons 10 cwt. :> Plaintiff purchased the chassis from the defendant for the sum of £650, on those representations. Plaintiff, however, contended that the representations were false, and that Fitzgerald had refused to supply the' car. Meanwhile, plaintiff had paid £295 as part of the purchase money, but he contended that the carrying power of the machine was less than represented, and claimed that in consequence he had suffered considerable loss in his tra«fc as a carrier. Fitzgerald contended that he had acted throughout as agent for Woods, who denied that Fitzgerald so aoted, and stated tßat plaintiff's remedy, if any, was against Fitzgerald. Plaintiff., therefore, prayed that the contract of purchase be annulled, and that the defendants, or either of theny, be ordered lo- pay plaintiff £295,' the part payment made, £150 as special damages, and £150 for general damages. Defendants contended that the car was up to the description given .by Fitz-gerald,-and that if the description given was not accurate, defendants had no knowledge' of tneir inaccuracy, and that they were made in the belief that they were true. (Proceeding.)