Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

PROPERTY DISPUTE

CLAIM FOR £816

SUPREME COURT CASE

An alleged refusal" on the part of iltobert Eichai-a Holmes, insurance coni: pany manager, of Wellington, to purchase a property at Cputts Street, Kilbirnie, aifter he had signed" a contract to ao so resulted in Stephen.Hope Ecld, contractor, of Wellington, claiming £816 damages from Mm at the Supreme Court today. _ The major portion of tha amount claimed represented ■ the difference between the contract price-and the market value of the property. . " ' ,' ■, Tho case is being heard by the Chief Justice (Sir Michael Myers). Mr. H. J. V. James appears for the plaintiff, and Mr. R. Hardie Boys forI the defendant!

• Both parties to tho action, said Mr. James, were speculators in city properties, not only in buying and selling, i but in exchangel On July 22,1933, the plaintiff and the defendant entered into a contract whereby Holmes was to purr Ichaso from Reid a property at 107 iCoutts Street for £2900. The contract iwas subject; to. Reid purchasing from (Holmes a property at'B4 Danioll Street for £800/ and another on the Esplanade at Petone for £300. The plaintiff had at all times been, and was still, willing to .carry out his part of the contract, but the defendant, it was alleged, had ■wholly repudiated Ms obligations under •the contract.

The defence was that the. title- to the Feton& property was not solely in the ■name of Holmes, and the other party, a Mrs. Manning,, would not agree to the sale. At the time of tho signing of the contract between Reid and Holmes the last-named, it was alleged, made an oral condition that tho contract should not bind him ,nnless and until Mrs. Manning consented \in writing to the •'sal.b of the Petone property.

Evidence- is being heard.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19331106.2.119

Bibliographic details

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 110, 6 November 1933, Page 9

Word Count
295

PROPERTY DISPUTE Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 110, 6 November 1933, Page 9

PROPERTY DISPUTE Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 110, 6 November 1933, Page 9

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert