SALE OF SUN BUILDING.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20851, 18 April 1931, Page 13

SALE OF SUN BUILDING.

DISPUTE OVER VALUATION.

FAILURE OF OBJECTION.

COURT UPHOLDS AWARD. / PURCHASER LOSES CASE. [BY TELEGRAPH. —PRESS ASSOCIATION.] WELLINGTON, Friday. Judgment was given by the Court of Appeal to-day on the application by Neiv Zealand Newspapers, Limited, that Sir Walter Stringer's valuation of the land and buildings of Sun Newspapers, Limited, Auckland, which were agreed to be purchased by New Zealand Newspapers, Limited, be set aside or remitted back to him for reconsideration. The Court dismissed the application. The facts outlined at the hearing of the case were, briefly, that by an agreement for sale and purchase, dated September 17 last, Sun Newspapers, Limited, agreed to sell to New Zealand Newspapers, Limited, certain Auckland assets. Clauses 1 and 2 provided that the plant, machinery, office equipment, land and buildings were to be purchased at a valuation, one valuer to be appointed by each company, and in the event of any difference of opinion arising it was to be referred to a third valuer independently appointed by the others, whose decision should be final. Valuation Fixed at £59,700. Sun Newspapers appointed Mr. T. B. Arthur, and New Zealand Newspapers appointed Mr. 11. E. Vaile, to act as their respective valuers. Differences of opinion arose as to the value to be placed on the land and buildings, and Sir Walter Stringer was appointed to act as umpire. On November 20 Sir Walter gave his

decision, fixing the value of the land and buildings at £59,700. Subsequently New Zealand Newspapers filed a motion to have the award remitted back to Sir Walter for reconsideration, upon the ground that he had adopted a principle erroneous in law when making his assessment. . At the request of the company Sir Walter made an affidavit setting out in full the basis upon which ho had arrived at his award, and the company's motion wjis removed into the Court of Appeal for argument. Mr. Johnstone, with him Mr. Rogerson, represented New Zealand Newspapers, Limited, and Mr. Northcroft, with him Mr. Cooke and Mr. James, appeared for the Sun.

Mr. Johnstone said New Zealand Newspapers, Limited, took the view that Sir Walter, in making the award, had taken an entirely wrong view of his duties arid had gone outside the scope of his authority. Chief Justice's Opinion. In opposing the motion, Mr. Northcroft submitted that there was- no evidence beforo the Court that Sir Walter had in any way violated the principle advocated by Mr. Johnstone, as binding an arbitrator" in making a valuation. Mr. Cooke submitted that even if a mistake had beeij made by Sir- Walter within the ambit of his reference, the Court could not correct it, because (1) the mistake was not of the kind which.would induce the Court to interfere; (2) there was no express admission by the arbitrator of a conscious mistake; (3) the arbitrator had not asked the Court tq correct the mistake.

The Chief Justice, JSir Michael Myers, in the concluding portion of his judgment, said:—"lf, then, it can be said that there, was a mi§take made by the umpire, I think the mistake was in regard to a matter within his jurisdiction, and, that being so, upon the authorities that I have cited, I am of opinion that the purchasing company cannot succeed in its present application. The umpire does not request the Court to remjt the award back to him on the ground of a mistake. Ha does not admit having made a mistake. Indeed, he asserts.,the contrary. For the above opinion, fails and must be dismissed. Judgments to the same effect were delivered by Justices Reed and Smith.: Justices Adams and Ostler concurred in the judgment of the Chief Justice. Costs, 100 guineas, and disbursements were allowed to Sun Newspapers, Limited.