ALLEGED FRAUD

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 110, 5 November 1925, Page 8

ALLEGED FRAUD

BAKER OR BLACKSMITH?

WELLINGTON ■ TRADESMEN AT

.VARIANCE.

At the Supreme Court yesterday before his Honour Mr. Justice Alpers aud a jury, of twelve, was heard the claim . oE Henry Anstice, master baker, Wellington, against Ernest Edward Griramett, of Wellington, for £500, the- ainouut paid by plaintiff for shares in the defendant's bakery business, as.the result of alleged fraudulent misrepresentation W the defendant's part. Mr. R. It. Scott appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. H. 11. Cornish for the defendant. , The statement of claim set out that for some time prior to Ist November, 1924/ the defendant carried on business as a baker'at Kilbirnie, Wellington. About October of that year he conceived the idea of forming a private limited liability company, and selling the business to the company for £1500, this amount to be paid in 500 fully paid £1 shares, and a.debenture', over the assets of the company for £1000. The defendant, it was alleged, fraudulently verbally misrepresented. to the plaintiff that 5000 to 6000 loaves were being sold overy week, whereas the number did not exceed 4000; also that the defendant fraudulently misrepresented, in writing, that the number of loaves sold per week was 5000. It was further alleged that during October, 1924, the defendant fraudulently entered in his record book numbers greater than the numbers of loaves actually baked by over a thousand loaves per week, and that he misrepresented to the plaintiff that, he had paid £1500 for the business, whereas the actual price was £1350. Plaintiff took £500 in shares in the company, which started business on Ist November, 1924, but went into liquidation on Ist May, 1925, and shares were worthless. Plaintiff claimed the sum of_ £500 as damages and costs of the action. Tho defence was a denial of the al-. leged misrepresentations. j PLAINTIFF'S EVIDENCE. Plaintiff stated in evidence that for thirteen years he had been employed in his brother's bakery business at Masterton. Its turnover was 5000 loaves per week; and the business was so successful that his 1 brother had been able to retire. His Honour: "I take it that it is admitted that he is an experienced baker?" Mr. Cornish: "No, your Honour; I understand that he is a blacksmith, and turned out shockingly bad bread." \ ■ ' Plaintiff added that he had not charge of tiu bakehouse, as he expected. Griinmctt took charge until they dismissed him. Cross-examined by Mr. Cornish, the plaintiff admitted that the bread waa bad the first week, and that they lost customers from the start. The reason for the bread being bad, he said, was that Griminett hud shifted the mixing place to a room above the oven, and that room was so hot that tho dough was boiled instead of setting properly. As a result the bread was "sad." He would not admit that it was actually blue in colour. The defendant said in his letter that the number of loaves sold was "approximately 5000 loaves" per week. He recognised the record book produced which showed that in September and October last from 4700 to 4800 loaves per week were sold; but said that another book which showed over 5000 a week sold had disappeared. In March last he refused to, give an option to sell the business for £1500; but Griminett would not say who the buyer was.

(Proceeding.)