TRAINERS’ DISPUTE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22084, 14 October 1933, Page 15

TRAINERS’ DISPUTE

MR BOYDIE DAVIS WINS ACTION QUARREL ABOUT GALLOPS. (From Ous Own Correspondent.) LONDON, August 5. Judgment has just been given in a case in which Mr Boydie Davis (formerly of Auckland) figured as the-previous owner of a training establishment on Roundway Downs, Devizes, Wilts. The action was for £1125 claimed under a legal charge given to secure payment of instalments of the purchase price agreed to be paid by Mr Davis for the establishment Known as Anzac. Mr Edward Timothy O'Sullivan, a racehorse trainer, brought the action, and Mr Davis counter claimed, alleging breach of a warranty that a reciprocal arrangement. with regard to gallops should be continued. • The case was heard in the King s Bench Division by Mr Justice Mackinnon. Mr W. I. Monckton, K.C., for . the plaintiff, explained that the training establishment at Anzac, Devizes, was sold to Mr Boydie Davis by Mrs Violet. 0 Sullivan, the plaintiff’s wife, for £9OOO, of which £4500 was paid in cash, and. a second mortgage was given to secure the payment of the balance in four halfyearly instalments of £1123 each. Only one instalment had been paid, and the action was brought in respect of the The warranties in respect of which the defendant counter claimed related to gallops. Mrs O’Sullivan had rights which were transferred to Mr Davis. ihey consisted of a right to use what were known as Pike’s gallops, terminable. in 1930 or 1933 if Mrs O'Sullivan exercised an option to extend. ' In addition, there were other gallops known as Butler's Gallops, primarily occupied by another trainer, but used by the O’Sullivans and the tenant who preceded Mr Davie by reciprocal arrangement with the other trainer. There was no sort of warranty about these gallops. ■ ... .- Mr Edward Timothy O’Sullivan, in evidence, said that he had .known the defendant, Mr Boydie Davis, in Australia, When Mr Davis defaulted in payment of the second instalment of f 1125 a deed of transfer was executed by Mrs O bumvan, and notice of that was given to Mr Davis. His wife,sold Anzac in 1931. He had himself had some difficulty with the Jockey Club stewards, and his licenses was withdrawn. He told Mr Davis that n thing could be put into writing with regard to Butler’s gallops. TRIP WIRE AND DITCH. Mr Boydie Davis, the defendant, «aid that in 1930 he was training at Erant, and was looking round for another place. Mr O’Sullivan spoke to him about Anzac. i±e told Mr O’Sullivan that he was anxious to have gallops which were five or six furlonga straight. Mr O Sullivan said he had them, and that M tong. a« the tenant of Butler’s gallops had the right to use Pike’s gallops, the tenant of Pik would have the right to use Butlers. As soon as he went up °Btk to see the gallops witness «|id ( he turned to Mr O’Sullivan and asked: Tim, are you sure the gallop? are in order. y O’Sullivan replied; Sure, boy, every thing is as I told you. So long as the tenant of Butler’s gallops can use, Pikes you have the right to use Butlers. , J In fact, there was anxiety and trouble all the time, and eventually a tn PY lre was put down between the two gallop • He went to Devizes and told the police, who removed the trip.wire. He also told the S.P.C.A., because if the trip wire had not been noticed m time there would have been a nasty accident. While the Chancery proceedings were going on he continued to use Butlers use of them was made impossible in March. 1932, by the digging of a permanent ditch. He left Anzac in he regarded himself .as a fairly good business man. In buying his former establishment arrant, he left it to his solicitor to see that he got all he wanted in writing. . What do you say you were gettmg in regard to Butler’s gallops?—! thought I was getting what Mr O’Sullivan promised, and that as long as the_tenant of Butler s was allowed to use Pikes gallops the owner of Anzac could use Butlers. How long was this to go on?—-Mr O bulivan told me that as long as Anzac was used as a training establishment the downs would be open for the training or racehorses. ~ , ~ . So that you would be able to use Butler’s gallops for ever?—So long as Anzac was a training establishment.

JUDGMENT FOR MR DAVIS. On the evidence his Lordship said he was satisfied from the first Mr Boydie Davis took the view that without the right to use Butler’s gallops this training establishment was of no service to him. Mr Boydie Davis went into possession of Anzac a short time before the completion of the purchase on March 2. Before that his Lordship held that the defendant had twice been assured that so long as he allowed a neighbouring trainer to use Pike’s gallops he would have the right to use Butler’s gallops._ Within a week of the time when he went into residence at Anzac.- Mr Davis was, however, ordered off the land by Mr Butler, and there was a row. After that Mr Boydie Davis would not have completed the purchase had he not been' assured that there was no foundation lor the attitude taken up by Mr Butler. His Lordship said that he was quite satisfied that assurance was given and that it was by reason of that assurance; that Mr Boydie Davis completed the purchase. The assurance could be treated as a contractual warranty. In- any case, it was given recklessly, and Mr Boydie

Davig was entitled to an abatement of the price in consequence. That abatement his Lordship fixed at £3375. The result was that there would De judgment for Mr Boydie Davis on the claim. ' . , ~ , On the counter-claim there would be a declaration that Mr Boydie Davis was not liable on the other outstanding instalments. . Judgment was given accordingly. I stay of execution was granted.