THE LYSNAR CASE

Evening Post, Volume CXX, Issue 105, 30 October 1935, Page 13

THE LYSNAR CASE

HUGE SUM INVOLVED

OVER £130,000 CLAIMED

-JUDGMENT OF COUKT

j In the Supreme Court today Mr.' J Justice Blair- disallowed the greater part of the claim for approximately £137,000, brought by William Douglas , Lysnar, station owner, and ex-member of Parliament, against the National Bank of New Zealand. His Honour allowed one sum of £42,000 by reason of the fact that the bank in a counterclaim was allowed to retain judgment for approximately £72,000. The only Other part of the judgment in favour of Lysnar was for the sum of £150. The judgment covered 72 typewritten foolscap pages and took over two hours to read. Last year Lysnar succeeded in an appeal to the Privy Council, which decided that there was a contract between him and the bank. He then asked the Court to assess damages for him against the bank because of an alleged breach of this contract, which concerned his Arowhana Station and the bank's advances in connection with the running of the property. It was contended for the bank that the claim was offset by Lysnar's indebtedness to it, which the bank alleged was greater than the amount he was entitled to claim. The following is a statement of the plaintiff's claim together with the effect of his Honour's judgment under each section: — (a) For the revival of liability to the East Coast Commissioner; the amount of which with interest being £11,746 j7s sd. Judgment: "The bank having settled this matter shortly before the hearing no damages become payable to the plaintiff and the sole remaining question is one of costs." (b) For the loss of plaintiff's rights to the Mangaotane Block, £42,874. Judgment: "Nothing is allowed." (c) For the increase in liability to the Bank, £42,000, or such sum as should be ascertained to represent the increase as at the date of judgment. This referred to the difference between the amount of the plaintiff's indebtedness to the bank before and after the reduction provided for in the agree-1 ment of May, 1931. Judgment: "This matter is specifically dealt with in the judgment, the result being that the plaintiff's claim is allowed by reason of the fact that the bank in the counterclaim is allowed to retain its judgment for the full amount, approximately £72,000, claimed by it. Certain adjustments relating to interest are also provided for." (d) The sum of £2000 per year for the detention of Arowhana Proper, plus any sum by which the amount owing to the Public Trustee as first mortgagee as at May 31, 1931, had been increased as at the date of judgment and also any unpaid rates and taxes at the date of judgment. Judgment: "Disallowed except as to the sum of £150 for damages as detailed in the foregoing judgment. There was no specific claim for damages upon the only basis upon which I consider the plaintiff entitled to them, and I have assumed they would come under this prayer of the claim." (c) For the loss of the stock on the whole of the property, £28,871 17s 6d. Judgment: "Disallowed." (f) The sum of £2749 for the wool, carcasses, etc., in existence at the time the bank took possession. Judgment: "Disallowed."

"As to the counter-claim by the defendant bank, and the judgment either entered or agreed to be entered pursuant to the arrangement of August. 1933, this judgment to stand."