KYLSANT APPEAL

Greymouth Evening Star, 5 November 1931, Page 5

KYLSANT APPEAL

DISMISSED BY COURT . PEER TO SERVE SENTENCE [BY CABLE —PRESS ASSN. —COPYRIGHT.] LONDON, November 4. Lord Kylsant’s appeal against h*s conviction and his sentence were dismissed. Lord Kylsant is likely to appeal to the House of Lords. A friend of Lord Kylsant said that he received the decision with the same calm dignity he had maintained throughout the case. Mr. Justice Avory, speaking deliberately, lengthily surveyed the history of the case, and expressed the opinion that there was ample evidence upon which the jury could reach the conclusion that the prospectus was false in a material particular, in that it conveyed a false impression, by putting before the investors figures which apparently disclosed the existing position of the company, but in fact concealed it. In other word, the document implied that the company was in a sound financial position and that prudent investors could safely invest therein. This implication arises particularly from the statement that.dividends were regularly paid over,a period of years:.This was misleading, because they were paid not from current earnings, but from earnings in the abnormal war-time period, and it was omitted from the document If there were evidence that the document was false in the particulars already indicated, there was ample evidence upon which tire jury could find that the appellant knew this falsity, knowing as he did the means whereby the dividend was paid. The Court unanimously came to the conclusion that there was no misdirection to the jury, and that there was ample evidence upon which the verdict must be supported so the appeal was dismissed.

Mr. Justice Avory, after a brief consultation with his colleagues, added that the Court was of opinion that the Judge’S direction to the jury was too favourable.

Lady Kylsant and the Earl of Coventry saw Lord Kylsant before he was taken to prison, in a taxi.

Lord Kylsant appealed against his sentence of one year’s imprisonment in the second division, for malpractice in connection with a prospectus of the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company.