BROKERS v. BANK

Greymouth Evening Star, 7 November 1931, Page 7

BROKERS v. BANK

A JURY’S VERDICT [BY CABLE —PRESS ASSN. —COPYRIGHT.] S SYDNEY, November 6. The hearing has concluded 'of, the action by Australian Brokerage Limited against the Australian t and New Zealand Banking Corporation. A series x of questions was put to the jury who found in favour of the defendant on the allegation of fraudulent misrepresentation and for plaintiff on the cause of action for breach of warranty under the contract. They found there was no loss of profit to the plaintiff compaity owing to the recession, of the agreement with the defendant bank. The jury assessed the loss in expenditure to plaintiff company in preparing to carry out the agreement with the bank at £2,500. Justice Stephen entered the following verdict: “A verdict is entered for plaintiff for one shilling, such entry by consent to be taken as forma y returned by the jury under my direction. Charges of “breach of jarranty , and fraud were based upon statements in defendant company’s prospectus of June 30, 1930, plaintiff company hawing contracted last year to be the sole broket’ of the defendant company in Australia, with rights to sell or underwrite shares, at par, to extent of two million pound shares in the capital of the defendant company.”