PROPERTY DEAL

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26177, 13 June 1946, Page 7

PROPERTY DEAL

BREACH OF CONTRACT ALLEGED DENIAL OF ILLEGAL BARGAIN Mr Justice Kennedy was engaged at the Supreme Court yesterday in hearing an action brought by Francis Joseph Plunket, a storeman, of Dunedin, and his wife Elizabeth Plunket, against Dora Birch Crighton for the specific performance of the sale of a house or, in the alternative, damages of £250. Mr J. B. Thomson appeared for the plaintiffs and Mr F. B. Adams for the defence.? Mr Thomson, outlining the case for the plaintiff, said that, by an agreement in writing on April 30, 1945, the plaintiffs agreed to purchase, and Henry Hugh Crighton agreed to sell for the sum of £I3OO, a property in Baker street. The transaction was subject to the sale by the Plunkets of their property in St. Heliers court, and this sale had been completed and had gone through the Land Sales Committee. The sale price of the Baker street property had been reduced by the Land Sales Committee from £I3OO to £I2OO, and Crighton had agreed to accept the price of £I2OO, and the sale was duly sealed by the Land Sales Committee. Counsel went on to state that Crighton had died in November of last year and that Mrs Crighton had refused to complete the contract. Plaintiff’s Evidence Francis Joseph Plunket, a storeman, said that he had entered into a cohtract for the sale of the St. Heliers court property preparatory to buying a property in Baker street. Mr and Mrs Crighton and their daughter were present at the house at 47 Baker street when he agreed to buy the place. He was later informed that the Land Sales Committee would not pass the sale at higher than £I2OO. He then went to see Crighton, who said that he was disappointed at not getting £I3OO. Witness told Crighton that he would see the agent who had made the sale and see if he would reduce his commission. Crighton did not say he would sell if the commission were reduced. The agent agreed to reduce his commission, and Crighton then agreed to let the sale go through at £I2OO. Witness said that later he received a letter from Crighton and then handed the matter over to his solicitor. He had never found Crighton in such a state of health that he was unfit to transact business. He was quite normal. Witness Denies Allegations Witness denied that there was any illegal contract between himself and Crighton. He had always been ready to complete the contract. To Mr Adams, witness said that he would deny that he agreed to pay £SO to Crighton in addition to the £I2OO named by the Land Sales Committee and also to pay half the costs of the lana agent’s commission. Elizabeth Plunket, wife of the previous witness, also gave evidence. Mr Adams said the defence would rest on the allegations of an illegal contract. Evidence for the Defence Mr Adams called Mrs Crighton to give evidence for the defence. The witness was allowed to sit in the body of the court. She said that her husband before his death was a very sicK man, and that she herself was in illhealth. She had had no idea of selling the house and had told her husband not to sell it or sigh any agreement. She subsequently refused to complete the contract. Witness said that when Plunket came to the house in Baker street with his wife and daughter to discuss the sale Plunket offered to pay £25 of the agent’s commission and also to give her husband £SO in addition to the £I2OO. Plunket said that he did not want anything said in the house to go outside. Dr R. F. Allan said that he had been the Crightons’ medical adviser for s6me years. Crighton had died in November of last year. Latterly his mind had been affected in that he seemed to lack the power of concentration. His ability to do business was not that of a healthy, normal man. To Mr Thomson, witness said that up to the last month of his illness the defendant Crighton’s health made him careless, and he just did not want to be bothered. He did not think Crighton was in a fit state to discuss intricate matters.

Daughter’s Version Hazel Alice Crighton, daughter of the defendant, said that she remembered an occasion when the plaintiff Plunket came alone to the house at lunch time. She and her mother and father were present. Plunket impressed on them very stTongly that nothing said then should be repeated outside the room. Plunket then offered to pay £25 of the land agent’s commission and £SO extra on the price of £I2OO for the purchase of the house. Her father’s health from April to June of last year was not good, and unless a matter was simple he could not grasp it. She knew the proposal was an illegal one because Plunket was so impressive about the secrecy of it.

James William Wilson, secretary of the Carriers’ Association, said that Crighton was the previous secretary. Witness said Crighton's ability varied from day to day. Mr Adams, addressing the court, said that if what Plunket had told the court was correct, the only thing the court could conclude was that the two women witnesses were not present at any interview with Plunket, and had conspired together to perjure themselves in claiming to be present and in their evidence as to what was said. If what the two witnesses said was correct, the contract had been vitiated by an illegality, and the plaintiff could not recover. Mr Thomson, for the plaintiff, submitted that Crighton was not suffering from any lack of mental incapacity when the contract was entered into. He also submitted that the evidence for the defence was highly coloured. There was not one word in the evidence to show that the wife and the daughter had ever protested against the father entering into the contract. He submitted that the court could not find- on the evidence before it that there had been an illegal bargain, and he would say that the story to d by Plunket was a perfectly natural and truthful story. . . His Honor reserved his decision