QUESTION OF CONTRAST

New Zealand Times, Volume L, Issue 11663, 30 October 1923, Page 7

QUESTION OF CONTRAST

SUGGESTION OF MISTAKE.

CLAIM BEFORE SUPREME COURT

.nr Justice MacGregor was occupied yerterday in hearing, a dispute between i« rt.H'c. in which it was stated that- an

unioruma>te had been made when drawing, up a contract for the purchase of a property. The- pla-inti#)*- in ilie ruction dpsired, that the. contract*. <>ho;?id he rescinded. Th*? plaintiffs, were. the. Wellington Hospital Board (who were only nominally interested), fvnd Ann Mary Stevenson. The defendant wjs Elizabeth Berryman. wife of John Berryman, a Wellington- hotelkeeper. Air W. F Ward appeared for the boards Mr C. P. Skerrett, K..C., and Mr. J. F. R. Ste-ven-

R-ovi, for the other, plaintiffs, and Mr C. | Treadwell for the defendant, j The pin in- tiff,, Mrs Stevenson, was the j lessee Iron* the plaintiff board- of a block of land in Clifton terrace. Being I desirous of, subjetting, she had made j a-.rrangemorjt3. accordingly with the | hoard, and a* plan was prepared. Pur~ Jftiiaut to-this agreement new leases were I granted to various sub-lesseen. In- | March, of L9?b, the phwntiff entered into an agreement with the defendant, negotiated through the agency of J. W. Ranscm, by which a- purchase, was arrangedl. It was stated that a mistake- 1 was made, in assigning the lease*, which i ! had arisen owing to-the fact- that pre- i vioue to the negotiations between the j plaintiff and the defendant it had been j intended to offer these sections for sub- J .citing at a rental of £lO per annum ; oac ,,v^en the plaintiff determined : to offer these, leases at an. increased j rental she overlooked that the. rentals i reser red. by the leasee were in each case the sum of £lO.

Tlie plaintiff prayed, that the issienment of the lease? might be set aside, and that the. defendant, and the other parties be ordered into and; execute such instrument and such deeds as- should l><? necessary to carry out and effectuate the contract* accor-di-ns to their, true intention, or (2) in the aJtemath e tha-t tho alignment- and- contracts be rescinded and set .aside.

Th* defence denied the allegations. It was in"’) denied that there had been anv common mistake to which the defendant aud Air- Stevenson were parties. It was also submitted that there had been no cause of action against the defendant

Mr Skerrett said the. court had juri* diction to make an order and rectify the mistake.

Considerable, evidence was called: for both parties, and the, court reserved ite decision.