PROMISSORY NOTE CASE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19762, 8 October 1927, Page 14

PROMISSORY NOTE CASE.

LEAVE TO APPEAL REFUSED. "NOTHING SINGULAR IN ACTION." [by telegraph.—own CORRESPONDENT, j HAMILTON. Friday. A motion tor leave to appeal from the decision of the Supreme Court in au action in which R. G. Vivian, bootmaker, Morrinsville (Mr. E. McGregor), was the appellant and William John Eyuor, farmer, Morrinsville (Mr. A. L. Tompkins), was the respondent, was dismissed by Mr. Justice Herdman in a reserved judgment delivered in Hamilton to-day. , His Honor said that before leave could be granted, some good reason must be shown. He had not to determine whether the judgment pronounced was right or wrong, but whether the questions arising in the litigation should be further considered. Respondent sued appellant on a promissory note which was dishonoured. Appellant endorsed the note as a surety. The note was one of a series of six notes given to secure the repayment of an advance to be made of £240. The Judge roviewed the complicated transactions which had occurred with the promissory notes and said the leading matter in issue in the case was whether the clandestine arrangement entered into by the respondent with the principal debtor that the latter should make preferential payments out of his earnings on account of an old debt entitled the surety to ayoid liability. There was nothing singular about the litigation, and it was not a test case in the sense that some unique set of facts or some novel question of law had given rise to the necessity for some new decision. There was nothing unprecedented in the case and no new principle was involved. while no great property rights were affected His Honor said he could find no justification for interference in tho present case. He therefore dismissed the motion, with costs. £3 3s.