A DEAL IN SHARES

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 11303, 31 August 1922, Page 10

A DEAL IN SHARES

ALLEGED MISREPRESENTATION. COURT RESERVES DECISION. In a claim for damages before Mr Justice Salmond, in the Supreme Court, allegations of fraudulent misrepresentation were made. The plaintiff was Charles Leopold Diamanti, retired hotelkeeper, of "Wellington, and the defendant Horatio de Courcey Martelli, refrigerating engineer. The sum of £3OO was claimed as damages, plaintiff alleging that the defendant, as the manager of the National Cool Stores and Ice Company, a private company, “falsely and fraudulently representing that the business of the company was prosperous and increasing,” induced him to buy 300 £1 shares in the company. It was alleged that the company was not then, and never had been, prosperous, and was now insolvent. The defence was that if the defendant had made any representations, it was not in writing, as was required by the Statute of Frauds Amendment Act, and, further, that any views expressed in discussion had been the honest opinion of the plaintiff. Mr C. A. L. Treadwell appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr O. C. Mazengarb for the defendant. On the resumption of the case yesterday, evidence was given by the defendant. The expenses of the business were, roughly, £SO a week, and the takingß in November, December, and January were about £2OO a month. These were the best months of the year. Several breakdowns in the plant entailed serious losses in perishable food destroyed and costly repairs. To Mr Treadwell: He looked after the engines, the books, the financial side of the business, and was managing director. Nobody received money on behalf of the company but himself. He had not told tho plaintiff that the company owed several hundred pounds at the time when the plaintiff was to take shares in it. To His Honour: The company was making ice, and had cold storage before tbe plaintiff came into the business. The company had, on the whole,: lost money before then. The new business was in the ice-cream line. It was impossible for him to have represehted the existing business as prosperous, but with the ice-cream trade offered 100 per cent, profit. Had it not been for tho break-down of the plant, the company would have prospered. His Honour: On a capital of £300? Witness said he wanted £6OO capi. tal. This concluded the evidence, after which Mr Treadwell addressed the court on the nonsuit point raised by Mr Mazengarb. Mr Mazengarb re plied. The court reserved its decision