NO PROOF OF CONTRACT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18631, 12 February 1924, Page 5

NO PROOF OF CONTRACT.

INVESTOR'S MONEY RETURNED ALLEGED BROKEN AGREEMENT. j An action prising out of the issue of Wellington City Council debentures came before Mr. Justice MacGrcgor and a jury of 12 in the Supreme Court on Friday, when Charles Thomas Payne, farmer, of Wellington, proceeded against the City Council for the recovery of £609 for an alleged breach of agreement. Plaintiff conducted his own case. Mr. J. O'Shea (city solicitor) appeared for the defence. The plaintiff stated that the City Council published a prospectus calling for tenders for £250,000 worth of debentures. He applied for £2400 worth and forwarded the amount to the corporation. After 18 months had elapsed the council sought to repudiate the investment and offered him his money back, with interest at the rate of 5 and 35-48 th per cent. He refused the offer. He claimed that the interest should have bsen at the rate of 6£ per cent, and that the investment should have been honoured instead of the money being returned after the matter had been held over so long. Mr. O'Shea maintained that no contract had been proved between the parties. The Judge considered that the plaintiff must be non-suited, as there had been no proof of a contract. His Honor advised plaintiff to seek legal advice.

Plaintiff said that lie had' not* been in a position to engage professional advice. His Honor remarked that it seemed ' to him that when a man was in a position to invest £2400 in one deal he would be in a position to pay for professional services. , •