ARCHITECT’S FEES

Manawatu Standard, Volume LI, Issue 10, 11 December 1930, Page 2

ARCHITECT’S FEES

CLAIM AND COUNTER CLAIM. LIBEL ACTION TO FOLLOW. WELLINGTON, Dec. 10. The first of four actions closely allied to one another, in one of which an amount of £4OOO for alleged libel is claimed, was heard by Mr Justice Ostler in the, Supreme Court to-day. The plaintiff was Oscar Albert Jorgensen, architect, of Pnlmerston North (Mr P. B. Fitzherbert and Mr S. W. Fitzherbert), who claimed recovery of £Bl9 6s, balance allegedly due for professional services rendered Thomas Beaumont Divan, hotel broker, of Wellington (Mr O’Leary and Mr Maule). Defendant denied the claim, and entered a counter-claim for £6Ol.

When the present action is concluded the remaining three will be proceeded with. They are: (1) An action by Jorgensen against Dwan for £4OOO damages, for alleged libel; (2) an action by Dwan against Jorgensen for £4OO, alleged deficiency on mortgagee’s sale, Dwan being a second mortgagor in a house property of Jorgensen's; (3) an action by Jorgensen against Dwan seeking an order that the mortgagee’s sale mentioned be set aside. A detailed statement of amounts alleged to be due was contained in the statement of claim heard yesterday, and it was set out that the total amount owing was £Bl9 ss. This, it was alleged, was the balance owing in respect of professional services rendered as an architect to the defendant, services which had been rendered at the defendant’s request.

The defence denied that the sum claimed, or any part of it, was due to the plaintiff tor professional services, and it was further contended that if any sum as claimed was due, the plaintiff had been paid in full, and the plaintiff lmd liim6elf given the defendant a full and complete clearance.

In liis counter-claim for £SOO the defendant set out that under a guarantee given by him he was liable to pay on account of the pLaintiff to the National Bank of New Zealand, Ltd., Palmerston North, the sum of £2Ol 17s 7d, and interest ns from July, 1930. In May, June and July, 1929, the counter-claim proceeded, the defendant had advanced by way of loan to the plaintiff, for payment to contractors, the sum of £450, of which amount only £l5O had been repaid, leaving a balance due of £3OO. The counter-claim, therefore, was for both the amounts mentioned —£501 17s 7d —while interest on the £2Ol was also claimed. Mr Fitzherbert’s opening address took almost two hours, and the plaintiff went into the box shortly before the luncheon adjournment. He was examined and cross-examined at length, his evidence deuling mainly with interviews he had had with Mr Dwan, and the various plans and specifications he had drawn up. Mr O’Leary also cross-examined at length as to whether his work was not of a speculative nature. When the court adjourned at 5 p.m., Mr O’Leary intimated that he had still a number of questions to ask.