DEFENCE OPENS

Stratford Evening Post, Volume II, Issue 114, 7 December 1932, Page 6

DEFENCE OPENS

CASE FOR THE BANK LYSNAR ACTION CONTINUED HEARING ADJOURNED j Press Association —Copyright Wellington, Deo. 6.—The case for ; the bank was presented in the Su- i preme Court to-day in the claim and j counter-claim in which William Doug- j las Lysnar, ex-M.P. for Gisborne, and j the National Bank of New Zealand are the parties. At the conclusion of j evidence the hearing was adjourned . until to-morrow. The claim and counter-claim total j over £120,000. Lysnar, who is suing | in person,, is claiming £50,919 from j the National Bank of New Zealand, | and the bank is counter-claiming for ! £71,990, the litigation arising over i an East Coast sheep' station at. Aro- j whana, near Gisborne. Mr. Justice • Macgregor is on the bench. Lysnar , is conducting his own case, and | Messrs T. C. A. Hislop and G. R. | Powles appear for the National Bank. Opening the case for the bank, Mr Hislop said that for many years Lysnar had been a customer of the bank. Large sums of money had been advanced to him, and when he got into difficulties some years ago the bank did j everything it could to help him. When the bank had been compelled to go j into possession of his property it had j not done so with any idea of pressing . the debtor but because the economic circumstances compelled it to do so. ■

The defence was firstly that no contract had ever been made, matters never getting beyond the stage of negotiations. All the terms which the bank laid down must have been conveyed to the Commissioner, and he must have agreed and notified the bank of his agreement before there could be any contract. It was submitted that the Commissioner never heard of the conditions made by the bank. A letter of May 1 was handed to Lysnar on definite conditions to which he agreed. Lysnar was told definitely that the control and management of the Arowhana station was to be by the bank. Furthermore, any new expenditure on the place was to bo subject to the bank’s approval. Thirdly, arrangements satisfactory to the bank had to be concluded with the Public Trustee (who held a mortgage over the front portion of the station). Those terms had been insisted on by the bank all along.

Phillip Roderick Mcßae Hannah, in- | specter of the National Bank, gave evi-} deuce that Grose, the general man- j ager, had made it clear that the bank j would agree to Lysnar coming to ar- j rangements with the East Coast Com- j missioner only on the three conditions named. ] Mr. J. T. Grose, general manager j of the defendant bank, confirmed the i circumstances in which a marginal ) note was made by him. Witness did \ not agree to the amount of control j proposed to be given to Lysnar in a j letter from the Commissioner, and j it was in an Interview with plaintiff on May 1 that the .condition was added in the marginal note, to which Lys- i nar agreed. That was in regard to j any new expenditure being subject to j the bank’s approval, and that any j surplus revenue was to be disposed j of as the bank advised. Subsequently | plaintiff repudiated that condition. | Cross-examined by counsel for the j plaintiff witness gave particulars of a | conversation between the Commissioner, Lysnar and himself in which witness said that the bank was prepared to write off a sum running into some thousands to give Lysnar a fighting chance. That was on March 30. Prior to the correspondence there were several interviews, and proposals made up to May 1 were all inconclu- I sive on May 1. Witness laid down ! conditions to which he required Lys- i nar to agree if the bank was to assist him. ! Corroborative evidence was given , by Henry Bellenden Gordon, assistant- j manager of the National - Bank, as to j what took place at an interview when | the conditions were discussed. The hearing was adjourned until to- : morrow. i