THE SUPREME COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume L, Issue 15482, 13 December 1913, Page 5

THE SUPREME COURT.

APPEAL CASES HEARD. v CONSIGNMENT OF STRAW. Two appeals against decisions of a magistrate were heard by His Honor Mr. Justice Cooper at the 'Supreme Court yesterday. The first case was an appeal against the judgment of Mr. F. V. Frazer, S.M., in an action in the Magistrate's Court, Auckland, brought by Winstone, Limited, against 0. S. Meredith and Co., of Waimate, for £46 3s 4d damages. Winstone's had claimed that they suffered damages through 20 tons of straw purchased by them from Meredith and Co., proving to bo unmerchantable on delivery. The contract was to deliver the straw f.o.b. Oamaru. Evidence in the case showed that tho straw contracted for was put on board in good condition, together with a largo quantity of straw which the appellants (Meredith and Co.) admitted was not merchantable. When the straw arrived in Auckland the shipment was picked over by different consignees, and Winstone's were amongst the last to choose their lot, which turned out to be bad. Mr. Frazer gavo judgment Kir Winstone, Ltd., and it was against this decision that Meredith and Co. appealed on the ground that tho decision was bad in law. Dr. H. D. Bamford appeared for the appellants, and Mr. 15. J. Prcndergast for tho respondents. The question for the Court was whether the appellants had duly performed their contract by putting on board the vessel the merchantable straw contracted for, as well as the admittedly bad straw, without marks identifying the respondents' straw from that of other consignees. It was admitted that the respondents would probably succeed in an action for neglect, but it was contended that they could not succeed in the present action. Dr. Bamford maintained that his clients' liability ceased when, under an f.o.b. contract, thoy put the straw on board the vessel. Mr. Prendergast argued that the appellants had the bill of lading made out to their order, and therefore the property did not pass until the bill of lading was transferred for a price. Judgment was reserved.

TRANSACTION IN LAND. In the second case, also an appeal from tho decision of Mr. Frazer, S.M., tho appellant was John Paton, of Papakura, and the respondent David Wilson, land agent, of Papakura. This case arose out of ,a land transaction, and was a claim for £102 8s commission, made by Wilson, in which he was successful. Paton then lodged an appeal on a point of fact. At the proceedings yesterday, Dr. H. D. Bamford, instructed by Messrs. Earl and Kent, appeared for appellant, and Mr. E. Mahoney for respondent. A preliminary point was raised as to whether proper service of tho notice of appeal had been made. After hearing argument, His Honor struck the appeal out on the ground that tho notice of appeal was served too late. Costs, £4 4s, were allowed.