LAND DEAL DISPUTE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LII, Issue 15849, 20 February 1915, Page 5

LAND DEAL DISPUTE.

WHANGAREI FARM CASE.

JUDGMENT FOE PLAINTIFF.,

SUM OF £375 AWARDED

The hearing of the claim for €700 damages for alleged misrepresentations in connection with the sale and purchase of a farm in the Whangar?: district, brought by Reginald H. Skeiton (Mr. J. R. Reed, K.C., with him Mr. W. D. Anderson) against William J. Holt (Dr. H. Dean Bamford and Mr. R. McYeagh), was concluded at the Supreme Court before His Honor Mr. Justice Cooper yesterday. His Honor having summed up, the jury retired to consider the issues placed before it. After a lengthy retirement, the jury answered the issues, in the form of a threefourths verdict, as follows: —

1. Did the defendant on March 28, 1914, represent to the plaintiff that the defendant had, four years previously, purchased the Morrinsville property for £650? Yes. 2. Was such representation false to the knowledge of the defendant? Yes. 3. Was the representation made with the intention that it should be acted upon by the plaintiff?— Yes. 4. Was the plaintiff thereby induced to enter into the contract referred to in the statement of —Yes. 5. Did the defendant on March 23, 1914, represent to the plaintiff that the said Morrinsville property was worth £1000?— Yes. 6. Was such representation made recklets'.v without an honest belief in its truth?— Yes. 7. Was the said representation made with the intention that it should be acted on by the plaintiff?— 8. Was the plaintiff thereby induced to enter into the said contract? Yes. 9. What damage, if any, has the plaintiff —Damage to the extent of £375.