CONTRACTOR’S CLAIM

Manawatu Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 3494, 2 November 1926, Page 2

CONTRACTOR’S CLAIM

ALLEGED BREACH OF CONTRACT Before Mr. R. M. Watson, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court yesterday, Franz Kaolin, contractor, proceeded against the Stevenage Construction Co., contracting onginners, of Napier and FcUdlng, claiming the sum of £25 for alleged breach of contract, and the sum of £l 9s 9d being balance owing by defendant for goods sold and work done by plaintiff. As a second and alternative cause of notion, plaintiff claimed the sum of £25 on a quantum meruit. The case arose out of the dismissal of plaintiff, who was engaged by defendant company to do certain work in con-itction with the Boro igh water supply improvement scheme. Plaintiff was to remove certain spoil, and a dispute over accounts lead to trouble respecting the engagement of plaintiff’s horses to' do certain other work. Plaintiff said that when he questioned the accounts, he was told to get off the property. He complied with the order and thereby lost other work and was refused permission to complete his contract. The defendant company, through its manager, said that defendant was ordered off the property following a dispute over the use of plaintiff’s horses on certain work. Plaintiff’s attitude and language could not bo tolerated in the camp, and that was the reason why ho was ordered off. The company had paid into Court the sum of £lO 2s Od in full settlement of the claim. A “Donnybrook” was really the origination of the trouble that lead to the dismissal of plaintiff. Waiter Whisker, labourer, employed at the camp, said that he did not recollect apy disturbance in the camp the night previous to' Kaolin being dismissed for using “language.” Had there been any drinking or disturbance witness Would havo hoard it.

In summing up, the Magistrate said that there was a conflict of evidence on the question of the termination of the contract, and having regard to Whisker’s evidence, he did not think plaintiff had established his claim for damages. In adjusting accounts, his Worship gave judgment for plaintiff for £ll ISs Gd, plus expenses £.l 9s, less the amount paid into Court.

Mr. D. C. Cullinane appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. T. Pagan for defendant company.