HOUSE FOR BRIDE

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 17947, 26 November 1932, Page 15

HOUSE FOR BRIDE

BROKEN ENGAGEMENT ACTION BY YOUNG MAN Preparations of a home for a prospective bride and the sequel of a broken engagement were described in the Auckland Supreme Court before Mr. Justice .Smith, when a young man sought the return of money expended on a property from the father of his former fiancee.

Plaintiff was Ronald Frederick George Quedley, grocer, who claimed from Samuel Harris, retired builder, the sum of £407 alleged to have been expended in performance of an agreement with defendant. Liability for payment of the claim was denied, and it was contended that plaintiff had contracted to buy the property from defendant for £404. “On the evidence I have formed the view that there was an oral agreement for purchase at £404, with the first year free of interest,” said His Honor. A good deal had been done to the property in the first year, but that was in terms of the agreement. It seemed plain to him- that the purchaser must bear the cost of the materials, and he could not find a basis for plaintiff’s claim. Judgment was given for defendant.