A. BETTING TRANSACTIO IN COURT

Otago Witness, Issue 2685, 30 August 1905, Page 52

A. BETTING TRANSACTIO IN COURT

WELLINGTON, August 2*. Judgment was given to-day by the Chief Justice in the case in which John Charlea Jones sued Frederick Hilton, a turf commission agent, for £4-2, the amount of a cheque drawn in favour of John M'Williams, paid by the latter to Jones, and subsequently dishonoured by the bank on account of payment being stopped by defendant Hilton. His Honor said he was of opinion from all the circumstances, especially from the relationship between plaintiff and M'WilJiams, that it was not a transfer of cheque from M'Williams to him, and that plaintiff took the cheque knowing that it had been dishonoured and knowing that there was something wrong with the cheque. It was clear M'Williams was really suing, Jones lending his name in order to try and recover money won by M'Williams from the defendant. The relationship between plaintiff and M'Williams showed that plaintiff ought to have known it was not a bona fide transaction. Judgment would go for defendant. Defendant as well as M'Williams had been engaged in an illegal transaction, but he did not know if that was sufficient to warrant him in refusing Hilton costs altogether. Were he to do so it might encourage those who had no claim, whatever because of an illegal transaction in bringing suoh actions into court. Defendant would be allowed £12 12s costs, witnesses' expenses, and diebursements. Tho documents in the case were ordered to b© impounded.