NON-SUIT GRANTED

Evening Post, Volume CXIII, Issue 31, 7 February 1927, Page 10

NON-SUIT GRANTED

MOTOR-CAR DEAL

MANTON V. CROSSLEY MOTORS

The case in which Frederick William Manton, merchant, of Wellington, claimed £400 from Cr.pssley Motors (New Zealand), Limited, arising out of the purchase of a motor-car, was concluded before Mr. Justice Ostler in the Supreme Court to-day.

Mr. J. F. B. Stevenson appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. D. M. Findlay for the defendant.

The plaintiff concluded his evidence, after which the defendant asked for a non-suit.

NON-SUIT SOUGHT,

Mr. Findlay submitted that there was no evidence of a kind to bring the case ■within the findings of Taylor and Combined Buyers. It was- quite clear that there was a contract for a specified, article under its trade name, and counsel submitted that the contract was for the sale of a specified article. He contended that there was no warranty or condition imported into the contract that the car would do 20 miles to the gallon. He submitted that the plaintiff had failed to prove any attempt at fraudulent representation, and an expressed warranty a.'i a condition of the contract. Counsel moved for s. non-suit.

Mr. Stevenson contended that the plaintiff had shown upon the evidence that the particular class of ear had acquired a general reputation for low petrol consumption, but the plaintiff's car, he submitted, in its petrol consumption was outside the class.

JUDGMENT AND A SUGGESTION.

In giving judgment, his Honour said he had come to a clear conclusion. Dealing with the question of representation, his Honour said that if it had been shown that the representation had been fraudulent, Manton no doubt would have had an action against the company, but the salesman honestly thought that the car would do 20 miles to the gallon. It had been argued that the representations made were part of the contract. On the evidence, his Honour said, he had come to the clear conclusion that they were no part of the contract. In regard to the point of merchantable quality, his Honour said the plaintiff had failed to prove that the car did not come up to the standard of its class. His Honour entered a non-suit with_ coats. He suggested that perhaps an arrangement might be come to between the plaintiff and the company in regard to the car.

Mr. Findlay: "That is on the assumption that there is no evidence contrary to the statements that have been made."

His Honour observed 'that his suggestion was quite outsido his judgment,