“ODIVA AND SEALS”

New Zealand Times, Volume L, Issue 11647, 11 October 1923, Page 3

“ODIVA AND SEALS”

THEATRICAL AGENT'S CLAIM,

The hearing was concluded before Mr W. G. Riddell, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court yesterday of the civil rase in which Victor Beck, a theatrical agent of Weiiington, proceeded against Captain Charles Frederick Adams, proprietor and director of the act, “Odiva and Seals," for the recovery of .£2OO by way of damages for alleged bre rich of an agreement, whereby tho plaintiff was to act as the defendant's adr.-nce agent in New Zealand Replying to tho address of counsel for the defendant. Mr H F. O’Leary (which has alreedy appeared in the “Times"), Mr P. Jackson, on behalf of Beck, said according to the defendant’ there was no complete agreement in existence, bnt counsel submitted that the contract was formed by the correspondence, which already had been produced. Adams, when in Australia, did not inform Beck of the date on which he expected to arrive in the Dominion, and Mr Jackson maintained that in the first place tho defendant broke the contract by his silence from February 17th right up to his arrival. He could very easily have advised Beck of his movements, and might even have sent a cable regarding his departure on the day that ho was supposed to leave Sydney. A furthor breach, counsel continued, occurred when the defendant, without Beck as his advance agent, opened up his tour of the Dominion. He had not sent the plaintiff either the information as to his arrival or the necessary circulars, newspaper notices, etc. Adams came straight to Wellington from Auckland, not, however, to eee the plaintiff, but to make arrangements for the New Zealand Picture Supplies to act as hie agents. Of course, the letter which Adams maintained ho sent to Beck, but which the latter denied receiving, a letter which was purported to have instructed the plaintiff to call on the Picture Supplies people, was in no way admitted by the plaintiff. In regard to the actual question of damages, Mr Jackson said that as pointed out W counsel for the defendant, it was tho duty of the plaintiff to minimise expense os far as possible. This, Mr Jackson maintained, his client had done, mainly by accepting tho situation with the Walter George Company, with whom he had an understanding that he could join tho defendant when his services were required. The magistrate decided to reserve his decision.