Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DAMAGED PEAS

ALLEGED LEAKY WALLS. MAGISTRATES COURT CASES. . A case was heard before Mr W. GRiddell, S.Myesterday, in which-W. H. ■ Long and Co., brokers, of Wellington, proceeded against John Nicol, of Wellington, .plumber, for loss through alleged breach of lease covenantsThe plaintiffs contention was that the defendant leased to him premises situate at 57, Cuba 6treet, with certain conditions pertaining to the lease; firstly, that the defendant put in order and good condition certain conveniences on the premises and also to make and'"keep all the waiis and floors free from damp. Plam-ids claimed that defendant had failed to observe these covenants of the lease, and m July, 1918, as a result of this alleged breach, water entered the premises end damaged a considerable quantity of peas which were stored on behalf of a client of plaintiffs, namely Messrs H. C Gibbons and Co., Ltd., and that H. C. Gibbons and C,o. sued the plaintiffs ior the amount of the damage and recovered tram the plaintiff the sum of £M 12s fid. Further, ad a result of the aforesaid happening, plaintiffs lost the use of' the premises for storage from August Ist, 1918, to November Ist, 1918, and thereby lost a sum. of 1229 &s, and further, plaintiffs had dncur/edl legal and. other costs amounting to JJIS 3s. The plaintiffs therefore claimed the sum. of J£B£ Is fid, made up as follows: —Amount of judgment paid to H. C- Gibbons and Co., -611 13s fid, storage £29 ss, and costs £l3 3*. Defendant’s contention was that the damage which Occurred whs beyond the ooutrol of the defendant lessor, and in auv case that when any down-pipe had become blocked, as was stated in the evidence, it was the plaintiff’s duty to clear it or advise the le6sor. so that it oould be put right. After hearing evidence at considerable length, Hi* Worship reserved his decieiog, and intimated that he would inspect the premises. Mr H. F. O'Leary appeared for the plaintiff and Mr O. C. ilaaengarb for defendants.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZTIM19210302.2.96

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVII, Issue 10838, 2 March 1921, Page 7

Word Count
337

DAMAGED PEAS New Zealand Times, Volume XLVII, Issue 10838, 2 March 1921, Page 7

DAMAGED PEAS New Zealand Times, Volume XLVII, Issue 10838, 2 March 1921, Page 7

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert