SHARE TRANSACTION

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21879, 15 August 1934, Page 15

SHARE TRANSACTION

ACTION AGAINST COMPANY WIDOWS CLAIM SUCCEEDS RETURN OF £2OO ORDERED Judgment for a widow who proceeded against a private company for the recovery of money she invested in 1932 was given in the Supreme Court yesterday. Plaintiff was Una Clarence Dignan (Mr. Webster), who claimed £2OO from the Citrus Products Company, Limited (Mr. L. G. Simpson). The case was heard by Mr. Justice Fair. Plaintiff said that in July, 1932, she was seeking an investment for £2OO. She was introduced by an acquaintance to Mr. H. T. Hunter, manager of the defendant company,- and interviewed him in connection with taking up shares in the company. She took up a position with the concern and 011 July 8 she paid to Mr. Hunter a Savings Bank cheque for £2OO and was given a receipt stating that the money was for 200 7 per cent preference shares in the company. The receipt was lost 01 1 mislaid, but plaintiff produced a copy. On about four- occasions, said plaintiff, she asked Mr. Hunter for the shares and each time lie said there had been some delay in the transfer of shares held by two other people to his brother and himself. She had never received any notices addressed to her as a shareholder in the company. Eventually the proceedings were instituted. Cross-examined, plaintiff said the receipt given her was a temporary one, until the share certificates were issued. It did not bear a 2d stamp. She had never made a written demand for the interest on the shares. John Ira Owen, accountant, employed by Hutchison,. Elliffo and Cameron, said his firm kept tho defendant company's books. 111 August, 1932, ho received from Mr. H. T. Hunter a letter in which tho following occurred: "Please enter up £2OO share capital 7 per cent J preference shares in the name of Una Clarence Dignan in the share register and have the scrip made. Deposit is in bank pass book. Make the date of receipt July 8, 1932, in the books."

Witness said lie did not carry out the instructions because there was no preference share capital in the company. He thought he mentioned this, verbally, to Mr. Hunter. Frederick James Dawson, master printer, said he knew plaintiff invested £2OO with the company. She showed him the receipt and he believed that the substance of it was contained in the copy produced. Mr. Simpson said the defence had been that the 'arrangement was for ordinary shares, but that fell to the ground following the production of the letter. As far as the defence was concerned the matter had been taken as far as it could go. "The letter settles the question as to the. kind of shares promised, beyond any doubt," His Honor said. Plaintiff had never received the shares nor any interest. A breach of contract bad been committed, and judgment would be for plaintiff for the full amount claimed, with costs.