HAWKE'S BAY CASE IN THE APPEAL COURT.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXI, Issue 5388, 22 May 1879, Page 3

HAWKE'S BAY CASE IN THE APPEAL COURT.

- ; In the Appeal Court at Wellington s last i Thursday, was heard the case of Troutbebk; v.' Richardson and' and thery a motion for' decree removed into the Court of Appeal; o'ufc of the Supreme Cduft^ under' aj Judge's order. The leading facts ap- : peared to be as follows: — The* plaintiff, and the late Thomas Hichardson, of! -Petane, Hawke's'Bay, onthe 27th- April,; 1875, entered into a deed of co-partnership) in - connection ■with their business as: graziers and sheep farmers. The deed re-j cite^tha^th^iparti^hai for many years j carried on their co-partnership business,.' .and were entitled as co-partnera to the! lands, stock, and other property mentioned] in .the schedule to the deed. The parties' stipulated that they would carry on the' business for the period of two , years from] the' date of "the dried for their joint andj Jititttual! [benefit. But the clause in the.; deed upon which the real controversy! f tumed-ms the following :— < <-•-««* j And furtheE|>that.dnVcase: of^the deaths of either of the said co-partners duringj the term, the said co-partnership shall bej thereby dissolved; :an'd the S&ryivor shall,' within a pe i rio ( d/of, J riin,e months from the] jdate. of silch, d^ath/ have the ootion of be-j corning thefpnrqhaser of- the^ctf-parTn<fr-j ship property; as ! specified iii the scheadle,' underwritten,, for" the price or sum of; £10,000. -~^'*>- ' •■■•*' j The full period of tyro years was ac-j complished, : '%ss." the,p()-partnership was' afterwards, "confinUed without", arty:, new; agreemenfijeiiig; entered .'irifb.* "Mr Ri-j chardson .left New Zealand .ipr^ JSpgland! on 29th August, 1876,' and died "there on; 19th November, 1877, : about seven months; .lifter v,tlle . .expiration.;; of , thejiistjipujajted;! term of two years, .Oft-.the^Cth/rXftijuary,! 1878, th f e;' plaintiff 'gave the, defendants,! who were theexecutors of -Thomas' : Sich- 1 vardson; ; notice in writing of their int'en-j tioii tq-purohase the deceased's ahare : 'in: the*cb-partriership property at the price of | £10,000. The right of" the 5 plaintiff -To [ buy was disputed in a letter dated 14th] February^ written by Mr 'Cbrnford, , p£ Napier, ■, as solicitor for defendant. ', On j the 16th August. 1878, the plaintiff.de-' livered another written notice* wherein hej claimed to purchase at the price of ijo'OOO. ■ The . questions , now argued were ,(!.)! • Whether' the plaintiff was entitled to pur--chase at all after the expiration of the! term of two years ; and (2.) Whether the* price payable under the deed was £10,000j dr., iJojOOO. in respect, of the deceased's share. Some disputed questions of fact arising upon the defendants' pleas were! for the time being shelved by consent,: and the statements raising them were' struck out, with leave to restore ; them; hereafter, if necessary. \ .■ The Attorney General (Mr Stout) and Mr Martin Chapman for the plaintiff, and. Mr Maccassey and Mr W. B. Edwards for* the defendant. Judgment waa reserved.!