Woman’s Claim On A.M.P. Fails

Northern Advocate, 13 May 1938, Page 3

Woman’s Claim On A.M.P. Fails

[Special To "Northern Advocate”]

PALMERSTON N„ This Day

An unusual case was heard before the Supreme Court yesterday, in which Miss Grace Berry, matron of the Pahiatua Hospital, sued the Australian Mutual Provident Insurance Society for £3OO. Counsel for plaintiff said that Miss Berry was suing the society for £3OO and interest on that sum; because she claimed that she lent it to the defendants for investment. The district manager for the company at that lime was Godfrey Halse, and when the policy matured she was asked to go to Palmerston North to see him.

Manager’s Suggestion

Halse suggested at the interview j that the society should invest the money for her at 7 per cent, interest. Halse also suggested that she should take out another endowment policy for a period of five years. In all, £316 was due to her, so she applied the odd £l6 toward the first premium of a new endowment policy; She agreed to leave £3OO with the society as suggested by Halse, being told that if unable at any time to pay the premium on the new policy the interest on'the £3OO could be used for that purpose. Subsequently plaintiff was informed that Halse had stolen her money, along with other moneys. It was then that she informed the society she must hold it responsible, as she had dealt with Halse as manager. She did not knew him personally. Non-Suited.

■ Counsel referred to the defence .raised by the society, which fell under two headings—that at no time had they received £3OO from the plaintiff, nor any other sum, and that Halse, as manager of the company in Palmerston North, had no authority from the society to receive any moneys from her, The question lo be decided, therefore, was whether Halse received the money acting, or professing to act. on behalf of the society^ Mr H. J. V. James, for the defendant society, submitted argument for a non-suit, which His Honour allowed. Briefly, the decision was that if there was any action there was a claim for a breach of trust, which must be brought before a judge alone and not a jury.