APPEAL COURT DIVIDED.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18275, 16 December 1922, Page 8

APPEAL COURT DIVIDED.

REFUSAL TO ACCEPT GOODS.

SUIT FOE DAMAGES FAILS. JBX TELEGRAPH. —PRESS ASBOfcIATIQN.] WELLINGTON. Friday. The Court of Appeal gave judgment this porning in the case of Oliver Brett, a traveller, versus Schneideman Brothers, Limited. A claim was brought by for £652 as damages for alleged wrongful refusal to accept delivery of certain suitings. In the Supreme Court judg-. ment was given for respondents. • In the course of his judgment the Chief Justice said half-pieces of suitings had been tendered, while whole pieces, had been ordered, and in his opinion appellant could not compel th« respondents to accept what had not been ordered. The attempt, moreover, by the appellant to charge a London buyer's xcmmission of 5 pen- cent. was also, he said, not justified, and the judgment should stand. Justices Hosking and Salmcpid were of opinion that the appellant had been exonerated by the respondeat from proving readiness and willingness to deliver the goods as ordered, and that the' conditic/n as to whole pieces being tendered had been waived. Their opinion was that the appeal should be allowed.

Mr. Justice Adams agreed with the Chief Justice that the judgment of the Supreme Court should stand! The result of the Court being equally divided is that the judgment of Bie Court below stands. No costs were allowed.