CLAIM FOR PROPERTY

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 838, 5 December 1929, Page 15

CLAIM FOR PROPERTY

WOMAN’S PETITION SUCCEEDS EX-NAVY MAN’S FARM From Our Oien Correspondent HAMILTON, Wednesday. Claiming that certain propertv in a deceased estate had been bought with her money, Amelia Alice Farvell asked Mr. Justice Herdman in the Supreme c -°2f t today to de ®*u.re that the portion "i the estate in question, now administered by the Public Trustee was her property Mr. F. A. do la Mare, on behalf of ti e Public Trustee, opposed the claim, and Mr. 11. nine appeared tor th© claimant. Mr. Hine said that for 19 years plaintiff and Richard Stevens had lived together as man and wife. Stevens had previously married a half-caste Maltese, Mho was still alive. Stevens died intestate in December, 1928, leaving a farm at near Te Kuiti, the equity on which was valued at £4BO. It would be shown that the money with which Stevens purchased the property was supplied by plaintiff. Insurance money, amounting to £250, had been paid to deceased’s wife. ARTIFICER IN NAVY Plaintiff said she met Stevens in Portsmouth in 1905. She went to the Isle of Wight in 1909 and took over a boarding house there. She sold out in May, 1911, for £IOO, and two months later left for New Zealand with Stevens. She had lived with him for two years on the Isle of Wight. He was then an artificer in the navy and came home once a month. Plaintiff and Stevens lived in Wellington and Wanganui. She supplied him with money with which to buy a house in AVanganui. This property was sold, and the proceeds were devoted to the purchase of the Aratoro property. Plaintiff considered that the property was hers. Plaintiff stated that while employed in the railway workshops at Wanganui Stevens had an accident and received £2BO in compensation. This money and another amount of £Go he handed to her. She later gave Stevens £4OO with which to buy the Aratoro farm. Plaintiff said it was merely an oversight that the farm was bought in Stevens’s, name as the money he had handed her was an absolute gift. For eight years she worked the farm, while Stevens was employed at a mill. She paid for the fencing, grass seed and manure. Plaintiff produced a bankbook showing she had held the moneys mentioned. FARM REGARDED AS MOTHER’S Evidence was given by plaintiff’s daughter that her father regarded the Aratoro farm as her mother’s. Air. de la Mare said the law was unequivocal on the matter. He did not ! see how plaintiff could succeed in her ! claim unless perhaps she could prove a partnership. Stevens treated this woman as his wife and paid ovA- his money to her. However much sympathy one might have with plaintiff tho Public Trustee had a duty tto the wife in Malta. His Honour found that Stevens acted as agent for Miss Farwell in making the purchase of the property at Aratoro, and that the purchase of the property was made by Miss Farwell for her own benefit. The property now held by the Public Trust would be :ransferred -to plaintiff. The Judge granted plaintiff’s petition and made the declaration sought.