DISTRICT COURT.

Grey River Argus, Volume XIII, Issue 1624, 18 October 1873, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT.

j (Before ihisHonor:, Judge Harvey.) i DAMAGES FOR^BREACH OP CONJTRA.CT, j ! R. Do Costa v. Stayert. 'and Mortimer,; Nelson. — Mr Guinness for the plaintiff;?Mr Newton: for defendants. This was a claim for L2OO, damages on account jof breach of contract by defendants in not .carrying out an agreementifor the'leasejofj certain premises, situated on Mawhera Qiiayi the shop lately occupied' : by Messrs Schlicting i; Bros.;' ' tSbaccbriists. Aftkr sundry preliminary telegrams had passedbetween the parties; the plaintiff offered L 125 per annum, wh'ich> was i = accented By the , defendants, on, ; the Bth /May,rfori a~ peridd of five years. ';, When the lease was' forwarded to plaintiffs for .signature jit, was found thst a portion .of the premises' occupied by. Mr. HosieljWasVnbfc included, and plaintiff called defendants'; attention to it. The latter also covenanted ,to ex-r pend L4O upon repairs of the premisejs. The plaintiff, however, signed |he lease as forwarded} ■'•ttut ••'•ha'd/' "nbl^reeeived . fo, executed copy from defendants;- —-He afterwards found ;put' that ..the trustee in* Schlichting Bros.'s estate had sold the remainder of the.lease to Mi? Hunterf OrL45, arid'he wanted^ to know what' Stayect ar dV> Mortimer intended to dp urider-thesecir-' cumstances; "'-The' defendants, in reply,-' said'theywould- endeavor to put;De CoslaTin possegsion. i; bu.t failing to be : ablento c 0 so, asked plaintiff what: amount of.cdrnpensatidn he ■ wo r uld require', "and • plaintiff in ans wersaid he thought Hunter could* be bought out for LSO, and" that a lie (plaintiff) would- requirb ; liso compensa^-,. tip,n, and also immediate possession. As no further steps- were taken •by - defend'arits legalSproceedings were 1 ih'r e&tened on ihe 7th July. Plaintiff had applied for: the -key 1 from defendants' agents here,' but had never yet got it, .although; he ' Haw tendered a f ,mqnth''s--ientjin;'aidyaiicei anjdthe lease ; signed by him, ! both.of which, however, were refused byVMr Naucarrow. The plaintiff, said he had refused L 75 for ■ the lease of the premisea, as he considered;; that/after; an expenditure of ; L4O-'they were worth at least LlB2 per annum;; anjd . that on June 9th^ the lease: altogether w^s wbrthLl3o to Llso. Dr Morice ! was thje" person: who offered L 75 for lease!, which was, 1 to alliappearance, a boiia ficfe =offer: ? Further, hewas awareof -all-steps takeri^ <and thoroughly conversant: with the contents of all correspondence. '*•■■■& j Dr Morice deposed to offering plaintiff L 75 as a bonus for the lease, and that he would still give it if the landlord , w,ould spend L4O in raising the building so astb remedy the damage done by the action of the Borough Council in making thejpresent footpaths. ■ The evidence ot Mr Nahcarrbw w'as'tb the effect that he had acted as agent for Stavertand Co. ' On.the '9^ June he re!membered De Costa ; tehdering. tb/e"rerit; but he' could np^ give possession because he; could' i^ot' get' the key from, the N trus,J>ee. , The highest offer he, had. for the .premises was L 3 per week. He had several ,pffersi •He-produced^a-letter. which -he-had-re-ceived from .defendants, in which they complained very bitterly of his having, misinformed : them as to the' 'value 6i 'the premises, pointing ; put that by. granting the tease .to De/Oosta they would^e losers to the. extent of LI 25, '' ' : Schlibhting Br,6;s' tenancy' ! was ! 'weekly at 'L2, and^the' rent was collected .by Nancarrow at intervals of about sthree months, when he thought proper to go for it. • A.*.-. ■ Numerous,witnesse3.,were examined, as. to the value they placed on the premises ' irir 'tjuestid'nU : Walter Hiil said that if he wanted the shop he would give froniLl3o to Ll4O bonus tori a .five years' lease. He paid L 3 J2s per week for his present

premises, and if he wanted it he would .give as much for Schlichting's shop. J. W. Hall valued the lease of the premises at Ll4O bonus. Edmund Wickes thought Ll5O was its value. H. H. Lahman considered the rent of the shop should be L 3 per- weeky -and -a five s yeara ? t(2lease worth L 155. H. H. Wplters thought the premises worth from. /L3. los' /to L4per week, and a five years' lease worth a the shop wor.th. L 3 per week. For the defericeV similar evidence as to the value of the premises was given, and comparisons instituted , between that- and other shQpsprijfcheQu'ay, particularly that new one lately pleased by Mr Taylor to Mr Singer for L 2 10s per week for three ■years, with the right of renewal fpr/lother three. Alexander Hunter stated 1 that he purchased the interest in the 1 premises from' the' Trustee for L4s bonus, ; and L2 per week, and he,, was; quite willing to sell out now, for, L 50 ,; Francis, HamUton said he considered L 2 per .weefcAan^xtreme rent for the premises, considering . the * sta^e ;' of ■; repair 5 ' whipt , [jtEey . were. Jairies Taylor gave similar evidence, and Alexander Hosie said thafc'he- 'would con* sider any man mad- who <w6nld"give f more than L 2 per week for a five yfiars' lease of the shop. ; .;>(:'; „;, After a long argunaent. las to -whether nominal iOr, substantial damagesViWould meet the case, ther. Judged said he; would : postpone his decision until Monday morniirig, : ; and .in the meantime he .would look over 'the' authorities;? which had; 'been quoted.:yjy. •.?■:! r.',<. : --,\ ;../■;■• >;u :r:so;;tr'; : BAND OP HOPE GOLD-MINING CO. This was an application to the Court to settle who should.be^heiqontri^tories to the costs, of winding.up. .this^company. I~> Mr 'Hazelderi 1 submitted 1 that the company/had nopower to settle the question in Greymouth,- it must be at Reefton, < withina the f iudiciardistridt^ of • Westland north. /.■■nifli'^'A bar. ~:m The Judge said he would- amend the order l By strikMg'-butf'^he Mvord "Greymouth " and inserting "Reefton."- Aa the Court had made the mistake the company should not be injured thereby, and he would grant rib- costs to aanybody«y v« ii'^MrjGuiririess argued !tha¥thellanrend?nierit?^couldinot be ordered' by Hjhe^Tudge sitting in another 'district. \ > ,r . The.,, Judge.: .We 11, .1 will \prder _the Order to be 'sent back to 'the District 'Judge- for Wdstland'northiifand when it reaches; him her will no doubt-ordeiat to be amended. .That. will. probablyJ^hfc the minute' ideas' of counsel." ' L '"'* T^V? L -:/.;■!.! IN: 'BANKRUPXCT. Final orders of discharge were granted to Johri-'Easyj Charles/ Patterson, and John Raan. Complete execution of deeds' of arrangement T were' ordered in the'esfetes bf -James ; M'Kf6ei ana-Ben-jamin JbrieV In J. M. (Langdon's case, ■the 12th; of December nwasv^xed^j ag the day upon jwhich',he should ; apply lot} his discharge.' Wa'-'i^M^inn-The other cases were adjourned until this mprning;at.len' o'clock.