COURT OF APPEAL.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 10298, 9 May 1896, Page 3

COURT OF APPEAL.

Wellington, Friday, j Argument in the oaae of Barker v. I Bdger and others was condnded at the I Court of Appeal this morning and the Court resenred Its deolsloD. The case or Lowman v. Foley is sow beiDg heard. . This is an appeal.fromthe judgment of Sir Patrick Baokley at last Napier elttlngs. The appellant agreed to purchase land near \Voodville tram respondent for £1600 BDd paid £100 deposit. By a clause of the agreement It was provided that on the non-payment of the balance of the purchase money on a certain data, all moneys paid should be forfeited to zespondent as liquidated and ascertained damages for breaoh of non-performance of agreement Appellant threw ap the purchase, and respondent retained the deposit and certain Interest paid to him. He afterwards sued (or farther damages end Sir Patriot Backley awarded him £50 and costs. The question raised on appeal ia whether, by the terms of the agreement, respondent) is precluded from recocting anything beyond the moneys f etained . and forfeited. Mr J. W. Carlile, of Napier appeared /or the appellant and Mr €. Bkerrett for the respondent. Lateb, Argamont was conoladed in the case of JfiOwman v. Foley at the Coart of Appeal this afteroooD. Judgment was reserved, end the Court adjourned till Monday.