ALLEGED FRAUD

Grey River Argus, 5 June 1943, Page 2

ALLEGED FRAUD

Brighton Coal Mines Ltd.

ACTION AGAINST PROMOTERS. P.A. CHRISTCHURCH, June 4.

The third application of its kind in New Zealand under Section 216 of the Companies Act, 1933, based on a report by the Official Assignee, was heard in the Supreme Court in Christchurch to-day before Mr.. Justice Northcroft. The defendants were Albert Adam Wilson, solicitor, of Westport; and Andrew Hunter, farmer, of Tiromoana. Both had been directors of Brighton Coal Mines Ltd, (in liquidation) which had been concerned with mining interests in the Buller district. After being occupied with the case throughout the day, tne Court reserved decision. Mr. A. W. Brown appeared in support of the application for the Official Assignee (official liquidator of the company). Counsel asked for an order directing that Wilson, and Hunter should not, without leave of the Court, be a director, or in any) way, whethex’ directly or indirectly, be concerned, oi’ take part, in the management of a company for a period not exceeding five years, from August 6, 1942. This was pxoved on the ground that the Official Assignee had made a further report, under the Act and had stated that, in his opinion, fraud nad been committed by the defendants in the promotion ox- formation of this and also since its formation. Messrs C. S’. Thomas and E. S. Bowie appeared fox’ Wilson, and Messrs W. R. Lascelles and H. M. S. Dawson ’represented Hunter. Unless fraud had been proved, said Mr. Thomas, the Court had no power to act. It was insufficient to prove negligence or muddlement. The onus i of proving that Wilson had been guilty of fraud was on the Official Assignee. He submitted that this had not been done . “Your Honour, in this report by the Official Assignee, is asked to infer many things which have not been based on evidence,” said Mr. Thomas. Mr. Lascelles, on behalf of Hunter, also submitted, that his client had not been associated with any traud. Hunter, he said, was a farmer, and this had been his first venture m company promotion. It was questionable how fax- such a man could be held responsible concerning the technical preparation of the prospectus particularly) on its legal side.