DISPUTED AGREEMENT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 16375, 1 November 1916, Page 9

DISPUTED AGREEMENT.

SUPPLIES TO CHEESE FACTORY.

[by TELEGRAPH.— CORRESPONDENT.] TE AWAMDTC, Tuesday. At the Te Awamutu Magistrate's Court Mr. E. Rawaon. S.M., heard evidence in jan action brought by the Waikato CoI operative Cheese Company, Ltd., against I Mrs. A. Henderson for £52 10s in respect I to alleged non-compliance with an agree- ' ment to deliver milk to the company's factory at Hairini. i It was argued by the claimants that • defendant, a year ago, bad been one of a ; number of settlers to move in the direc- , tion of establishing a cheese factory, as - an outcome of which the present company ! was established. It had at first been deI sired to secure the milk supply from 700 ; cows, and, although over that number I were now supplying, the concern had I started with 525 cows. It was with the knowledge of this reduced number that the settlers in meeting approved the scheme and signed the disputed agreement. In the document several blank spaces had been left for later filling up . to allow for the inclusion of other probable suppliers. Defendant argued that there had been material misrepresentation, in that it had I been a stipulation that the factory would ! not. start until the number of 600 cows ! were supplying, and that it had been held out as an inducement to her that the butter factory in the district would cease operations. After hearing lengthy evidence the magistrate reserved his decision, remarking that he would endeavour to support the claimants under the equity and good conscience clauses, but it appeared to be a question of law as to whether the agreement was not voided by the fact that it had been drawn up before the registration of the company. If there were no Erincipals, how could there be agency, and ow could there be any responsibility on individuals to a principal which was only supposed to come into existence at some future date?