TAURAWA BLOCK CASE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 14300, 21 February 1910, Page 6

TAURAWA BLOCK CASE.

THE AGREEMENT CANCELLED. TIMBER AND GRAZING RIGHTS. The hearing of the action Thomas Holden, sheep-farmer, of Hamilton, v. John Black, timber merchant, of Auckland, in which plaintiff applied to have certain agreements transferring to the defendant timber and graaing rights in respect of the Taurawa native land block in the Waikato declared void, was continued before Mr. Justice Edwards at, the civil sessions of the Supreme Court on Saturday. Ewen McGregor was a co-plaintiff in the case, he having undertaken the adjustment the affairs of Holden (his brother-in-law). The principal grounds of the claim were that the agreements were executed in a precipitous manner, that the plaintiff, on account of a severe nervous breakdown, was not in a fit state at the time to transact business on his own behalf, and that the documents were signed without adequate legal advice on the plaintiff's side. Mr. Myers, Wellington (instructed by Mr. Gillies), appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Blair, Wellington, for the defence. John Black 7 the defendant, said he spent over 200 days in visiting various parts of the- country in securing'the en- } dorsement of the agreements by the Native | Land Court- and transacting other busij ness in connection with the Taurawa I Block. The first he knew of Holden's i delicate state of health was after the ! commencement of the present action. He [-was always bright and cheerful while I defendant was at his house. At the conclusion of the defendant's evidence Mr. Blair intimated that he had arrived at an agreement with Mr. Myers, whereby the defendant withdrew his defence and consented to a decree in terms of paragraphs 1 and 2 of the amended statement of claim, in so far as they asked that the agreement of July 7 be set aside and declared void. The optional agreement would consequently lapse, and the case Black v. Georgetti, which was an action to recover half of the expenses incurred in. connection with the Taurawa Block, would be struck out. It was explained that the defendant was i entitled to repayment of the money be had expended on the property during the time it was in his possession, but that in terms of the agreement the plaintiff had agreed to accept the equivalent to that amount as costs in respect of the action. His Honor signified approval of the settlement.