A HORSE CASE.

Marlborough Express, Volume XLVII, Issue 139, 14 June 1913, Page 7

A HORSE CASE.

CLAIM IN MAGISTRATE'S1

COURT.

The case of Albert Ha.ywa.rd, of "Ward, v. Alfred Davies, of Hapuku, and John Richard "Wallace of Kaikoura, a claim for £35, was heard by Mr F. 08. Loughnan, S.M., yesteriVTr C. H. Mills appeared for the plaintiff; Mr S. P. McNab for Davies, and Mr "W. T. Churchward for WalThe statement of claim set out that on May 23rd, 1912, "Wallace sold by his agent Baillie to the plamtiff a bay gelding, "Dick," for £25 the receipt of which sum was acknowledged. Shortly afterwards Davies seized and took away from the plaintiff the gelding, and refused and &taii refused to give up possession. - Ihe plaintiff, being in doubt as to' the person from whom he was entitled to redress hereby, in pursuance ot bection 5.0 of the Magistrate's Court Act, 1908, claimed alternatively against the ■defendants for possession of the gelding or £25 in case possession could not bo had, and also £10 as damages for thereof. . _ . Mr McNab explained, that Davies 'bought the horse in May, 1911, and "kept possession of it till November, 1911, when he leased it under a hirepurchase agreement to A. Maxton for £2 por month. The sum of £12 was paid for hire, and Maxton disappeared in February 12th. Dayies put the matter in the hands of the police, and ultimately on May 29th ho found the horse with Mr Hay ward, who, on the position being explained, was perfectly satisfied to give up the horse to him. Legal argument onsuod as to -whether the hire-purchaso agreement referred to entitled Maxton to dispose of the horse to Bayward, and was held.over pending the taking of evidence. Alfred Davies, one of the dew fendants, was called by Mr Mills. He said that on May 29th, 1912, Hay ward told him that he bought the horse from Baillie for £25. The witness produced to Mr Hayward his agreement with Maxton made in November, 1911, and Hayward readily gave up the horse, and said that he would look to Baillie or Wallace for his money. In June, 1912, he received a, legal letter demanding the return of the horse to Hayward. Charles H. Willis, auctioneer, Kaikoura, and John R. Wallace, replying to Mr Churchward, gave evidence as to being told separately by Davies that he sold the hor.so to Maxton, nnd took steps to get possession of it

again, as he had received only £10, and £12 was still owing on it. Mr Mills said there was no dispute bo far ac the plaintiff was concerned. He left it to the Court to say which of the two defendants he had to look Mr MoNab submitted that the Written agreement between Davies a,nd Maxton spoke for itself. It was a hire-purchase agreement merely, ana Maxton was not entitled to sell to Hayward, nor was the latter entitled ■ to withhold the horse from Davies. ■ Mr Churchward said he would like ; a further opportunity of arguing as to . the nature of the agreement and quot- ; ing authorities. In the meantime he j submitted (1) that in his subsequent j conduct Maxton exercised an act.or j ownership, and showed that the hire- i purchase agreement was determined ; and made a contract of purchase; and j (2) that the question of estoppel ap- j plied as between the defendants. ! His Worship said he preferred to j hear counsel argue the case, and would j like to look into recent leading cases. s It was arranged that counsel should j let his Worship know when it would I be convenient to them to take the j argument.