PROPERTY DEAL

Evening Post, Volume CXXIII, Issue 117, 19 May 1937, Page 13

PROPERTY DEAL

DISPUTED IN COURT

QUESTION OF AUTHORITY

Dealings between a prospective purchaser, a land agent, and'the owner of a house property in Grafton Road, Roseneath, were'the subject of litigation iri the Supreme Court today when E. K. Thurkettle, a clerk, sued A. C. V. Johnson, an electrical contractor, seeking specific performance of an alleged contract for the sale of Johnson's house property to Thurkettle, through Edward Jones, a land agent. Thurkettle claimed also £75 damages for non-performance to date. Mr. Justice Ostler heard the case, in which Mr. G. C. Kent appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. M. F. Luckie for the. defendant. ,' The plaintiff, in his . statement of claim, said that in August, 1936, he entered into an agreement to purchase from the defendant the latter's house property in Grafton Road. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement he paid to Edward Jones, the defendant's agent, £50 by way of deposit, but the defendant had refused or failed to complete the agreement to purchase by executing the necessary memorandum of transfer and accepting the balance of'the money'owing-on the property. The defence was that the agreement was. .entered into without the knowledge or the authority of the defendant; that Jones had no authority to ma^e such a contract or accept money on the defendant's behalf; and that the defendant was under no obligation in respect of the alleged agreement. Mr. Kent said that the evidence for the plaintiff would show that Jones, who arranged the sale to Thurkettle, had Johnson's signed authority to sell, and" that Johnson at first approved of the sale but later repudiated it.

His Honour remarked, after hearing Mr. Kent's opening address, that the case seemed to turn on _ the question of the agent's authority to sell. Evidence was then called lor the plaintiff. ' (Proceeding.)