CLUTHA LEADER CASE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20893, 6 December 1929, Page 3

CLUTHA LEADER CASE.

* LEGAL ARGUMENT HEARD. j 1 HIS HONOR RESERVES DECISION. ■ I _. } After a hearing -which lasted three days the conclusion was reached in the Supreme Court before his Honor Mr Justice Kennedy yesterday in the case in which William Twaddle, as representative of a syndicate, proceeded against Albert Eden Bussell, Robert Ja» Millis, and James Eadcliffe M’Naughton the proprietors of the Clutha Leader, for I specific performance of an alleged contract, to sell the newspaper' The whole of yesterday’s proceedings were confined to legal argument, about 50 legal volumes being piled on. the solicitors’ table in the court. The plaintiff was represented by Mr A. T. Donnelly, of Christchurch, and Mr F. B, Adams. Mr W. G. Hay appeared for Russell, Mr" C. L. Calvert for M Naughton, and Mr R. S. Bremncr for ' Millie. Mr Hay said the case had been reduced to the form of one for specific performance or, as an alternative, rectification on the grounds of mistake. The claim for damages had now been entirely abandoned. In tho first place he desired to direct attention to. tho exact contract which was alleged and on which specific performance was asked. Mr Donnelly , "ad, in his opening address, set out the alleged position, stating that the sale took place on the original conditions except that M'Naughton had declined to sign the deed of covenant. Mistake, on the grounds of which rectification was asked, had not been proved. Twaddle was acting for a syndicate, but if all the parties had been before the court Millie would have been both plaintiff and defendant'and would, have had the honour of suing himself. Counsel submitted that there had never been a completed contract, and tKo sale had been carried out under the condition that the deed of covenant was to be signed by ail three defendants. During the course' of hi? remarks counsel stated that lie knew that bona fide mistakes occurred, and he wished to say nothing derogatory to Mr Kelly, and he regretted some remark™ . -which Mr Donnelly had made in respect of Mr Walter. At the conclusion of his address, which occupied an hour and a-half, Mr Hay referred to a statement by Mr Donnelly that Mr Walter had said that Russell had ■ looked about, could find no better investment than the newspaper, and had written to an eminent counsel in Dunedin' to see whether he could get him out of tho deal. There wifs no evidence before the court, said Mr Hay, to support that'statement. There was no justification for any attack on Mr Walter. ; Mr Bremncr, on being given leave to address the court on the question of costs as far as Millis.was concerned, said that his client had always- regarded the sale as valid and had done what he could N to put it through. The proceedings had been brought about through no": fault of' his, and it would be a hardship if he were called upon to pay costs. His Honor: You did not deal with the question of costs if tho plaintiff fails. —(Laughter.) Mr Breraner: I would claim full costs In that case. Mr Adams, stated that he first wanted, to refer to the defendants’ offer to sell on the footing that the plaintiff paid Russell’s estimate of f 1750 for the goodwill without getting any covenant. The idea was that the plaintiff should buy at a price over which ' Russell had chuckled and not get all , that had been agreed upon. Counsel reviewed the evidence at length, claiming that there had been a contract and-that M'Naughton had not shown that he : had thought otherwise. After the auction ha had ■ never acted like a man >'ho- had been over-ruled. ,* ... Mr Adams’s address lasted for two hours, his Honor Reserving his decision.