TRUST ACT BREACHES,

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18235, 31 October 1922, Page 8

TRUST ACT BREACHES,

OANIARU COAL SUPPLIES.

ASSOCIATION'S OPERATIONS

COMPANIES TO PAY £105.

[BX IBLSOBAPH. —PEESS ASSOCIATION.] DUNEDIN. Mo»sd».?. In the previously heard actioi; v.>:cvghi against a number of coal concerns for penaltiea of £500 each for v alleged breaches of the Commercial Trust Act, Mr. Justice Hosking's judgment was delivered this morning. His Honor found-that the Kaitangata Company and the Shag Point Coal Company had committed breaches of tho Commercial Trusts Act in agreeing to give tho concessions described to members of the Oamaru Coal Merchants' Association, and in refusing to supply to Brown. ! because he was not a member of tho association. Judgment -was entered against both companies for £105 and costs. For aiding and abetting the Kaitangata Company, several defendants- were fined £5 each, including tho West port Company. Tor conspiring with tho Kaitangata Company, several defendants and tha Westport Coal Company were further fined £10 each, and the New Zealand Express Company £5 and costs. The Exclusion of Brown. His Honor held it was sufficiently established that the Oamaru Coal Merchants' Association did have as one of its objects the control, determination, and influencing of the supply and prices of coal in the town of Oamaru or acted with that object at the times of the acts complained of and therefore came within the definition of a commercial trust. In November, 1921," the Kaitangata Company learned that the Mount Linton Coal Company had purchased tho retail busi. ness of one of the coal merchants at . Oamaru. Therefore, to enable tho other retailers to compete with the Mount Linton Company, tho Kaitangata Company made a reduction. It is obvious that tho Kaitangata Company was reluctant to take up any attitude of exclusion toward Brown until it found that its trade was ' endangered t<y the Mount Linton Company and Brown in combination, but even then His Honor inferred from the evidence that it was the pressure of the association that brought the Kaitangata Company to act when it did. The reason for requiring that Brown should_ join the association was that the association would keep Brown in line as regards prices and noricutting, and that each of tho members of the association could be similarly kspt in line. If any one of them had broken away and been adjudged a defaulter then, according to the company's undertaking to supply only members of i tie association, it must have excluded l '. -jat perron also from the benefit of the" reduction. Preservation of Business. ' The company sought to attain its ends '! by confining the reduction to members of 1 1 t-ne association. It agreed to give a reauction to them because by their expected : action and help the ends both of tho t association and itself would be served. It Brown because he waa not a member and agreed to give a concession • to the others only because they were • members. The preservation of its busiI ness was th& end which it had in view, j but it allowed a reduction to members only of the association because by their !. being members of it that end might be ' accomplished. '■: The judgment finds that the Shag Point ■ | Company also agreed to supply membera , of the association with coal at a lowejj [ prico than it would supply Brown. ( As to those charged with I aiding and I abetting tho Kaitangata and Shag Point , Companies, it was immaterial whether the t defendants who procured the commission i of the offences Were or were not jnemi bers of the association. In the case of • the Kaitangata Company not only the • minutes, but direct testimony showed that ' i certain of the defendants were present •' at tho meeting on September 14, and > considered Brown's application to become , a member and that the same defendants i wero present at the meeting on November . 17, wnich accepted tho decision that the i reduction should apply only to rriemhers ; of tho association. There was sufficient evidence in thoso acta established that

: these defendants aided and abetted the • Kaitangata Company in excluding Brown • I from coal supplies. I The charges of aiding and abetting the

Shag Point Company were held to be m proved and were dismissed. Aa to the charge of conspiring, Hii Honor held that, the evidence established a breach of section 5 of th© Act, defendants having conspired with each other t?< partially control the supply and the price of coal in Oamaru.