OWNERSHIP OF MONEYS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19289, 30 March 1926, Page 14

OWNERSHIP OF MONEYS.

PROCEEDS FROM A FARM. WIFE OPPOSING ASSIGNEE. A COMPLICATED ACTION. [BY TELEGRAPH. —OWN CORRESPONDENT.] HAMILTON. Monday. The ownership of moneys totalling £3OO, paid by the Cambridge Co-opera-tive Dairy Company for-butter-fat supplied by a shareholder, but still held by the company, was an issue the Hamilton Supreme Court was calJed upon to decide to-day. The official assignee, in the bankrupt estate of Harold Elliott Porritt, sought to recover the money from the company, while Elizabeth Deans Porritt, wife of the. bankrupt, also claimed it. Mr. Justice Ostler was on the Bench. Mr. Watts appeared for the official assignee, Mr. Lewis for the dairy comany, and Messrs. Northcroft and Tompkins for Mrs. Porritt. Mr. Watts said P<lrritt came to the Waikato in 1914"and bought, a property at Matamata. His wife lent him £SOO as a deposit on the property and £SOO for the purchases of stock. In 1918 he sold the Matamata property, and a farm at Te Kowhai was purchased in Mrs. Porritt's name Mrs. Porritt paid £IOOO as a deposit. The stock from Matamata was brought over to Te Kowhai. In 1921, while Porritt and his/wife were living at To Kowhai, Porritt bought a place at Kaipaki in his own name.

The To Kowhai property was sold for cash in 1923, and Mrs. Porritt received £4OOO. Later in that year Mrs. Porritt bought a farm at, Pukeroro, paying £IOOO as a deposit. In 1922 Porritt gave security for an advance on tho stock on the Te Kowhai and Kaipaki properties to the Union Bank. At the same time ho gave a hill of salo to Mrs. Porritt for £IOOO over the same stock. Difficulties arose in 1925 over the Kaipaki property, and Porritt was adjudicated bankrupt iu September. The cream from the Pukeroro farm was supplied in Porritt's name to the Cambridge Dairy Company, but prior to the bankruptcy the shares in the company were transferred to Mrs. Porritt. The question His Honor was called on to decide was whether the Pukeroro farm was Porritt's business or whether. Porritt was acting as the agent of his wife with respect to that property. Mr. Northcroft contended that tlio stock was not Porritt's, but actually bolonged to his wife, and always belonged to her, although she gave the Union Bank an indemnity in the form of a disclaimer of ownership as a protection of the bank's interests. After evidence had been heard Mr. Watts agreed with His Honor that Mrs. Porritt would have to bo credited with rent for her farm and remuneration for her services in connection with tho earning of the proceeds hold by the dairy company, and he also conceded that the action concerned only those moneys actually held by the company and not those that had been paid to Mrs. Porritt. Argument and decision were deferred pending the hearing of another case arising out of the same circumstances, in which Thomas A. Low, the holder of tho biLl of salo on tho stock, aftor the Union Bank had been paid off, sued the Loan and Mercantile Agency for tho proceeds of» the stock sold by tho company. The proceeds had been handed to the official assignee. After hearing argument on both cases His Honor reserved his decision.