NOT AGREEMENT TO SELL

Taranaki Daily News, 27 August 1930, Page 15

NOT AGREEMENT TO SELL

AGENT SIGNED FOR DEPOSIT FARM NEAR MANAIA'IK QUESTION WOULD-BE BUYER NON-SUITED. Without calling on the other side Mr. Justice Ostler at .New Plymouth yesterday non-suited James Crooks in his claim against Thomas Patrick Magan for specific performance of an agreement for the sale and purchase of a farm, near Manaia and for £3OO for withholding the , transfer of the property. Mr St. L. ..Reeves, appeared for Crooks and Mr. C. 11. Croker for Magan. > Mr. Reeves said this was not an ordinary action in which an agreement had actually been signed by both ..parties. but it would be- shown that the transaction was the .result: of a letter written by Magan: to . his agents offering- certain terms acceptable to- the purchaser. :■ . .In February Magan-, who four-yeans .previously -hade purchased:-a - leasehold farm through, the.;same.-agents, wrote them a letter advising that he intended to.. place - the. farm 'on the market.. -He also asked for particulars of a suitable farm, for him in. South Taranaki. ■ .The agents replied giving Magan the particulars. asked -of a farm they considered suitable. In addition they asked him for full particulars of hia leasehold interests. These Magan sent next day in a letter .in. which he«.gave as full particulars as possible of the stock, chattels and-the-farm. :, As: a result of that letter, the agents, introduced -a possible purchaser and had him inspect the farm. No sale eventuated and shortly afterwards, another possible purchaser, ; .Crooks,.,:was-..shown. the■■ property, Later-, he . went, to. ■ -.the. agents’-- officki paid a deposit of £lOO-and signed an agreement for sale and purchase on the understanding contained in the letter from Magan to the agents, WOULD . NOT COMPLETE SALE. The agents immediately telegraphed Magan that a sale had taken place. It was not until . the following morning that Magan replied saying he would not go on with the.sale. Further negotiations- were entered into, but Magan would not go on. His Honour: On your opening I don’t see how you can go on with the case and say . any agreement can be enforc--ed.

Mr. Reeves admitted that the only part, performance of the agreement was the payment :of . £lOO. His Honour said that had been amply held not to be part of specific performance.

.Counsel submitted the receipt and Magan’s letter constituted a memorandum sufficient to satisfy the statute. He submitted Magan’s letter to the agents gave authority , to sell. His Honour: Well, that may help you. In evidence Crooks said he • had lost the benefit of practically two months .on the farm as a result of Magan’s action. Thirty co'ws were timed to calve in July. He d ; d not know whether they had calved, but if they had he would haye received some profit from them. The farm suited him and he had lost the chance of getting another. If he had had the cows tins season he would have had a profit of £7OO and would still have been deriving profit from them. Mr. Croker: Would the '£7oo profit be only a guess, or have you worked it out? —It is only a guess. He admitted that for... July the only income he would have expected would have been from the cows.

Mr. Croker pointed out that 43 cows had come into profit and Magan, at the outside, expected not more than £6O for this month. .Crooks said the receipts would depend on the cows and the returns. He thought a cow should give 451 b. of fat a month. Mr. Croker: At an average of 36 cows that would represent 16201 b. of fat for this month. How much would you expect to get for it? —That would depend on the factory returns. RETURNS FROM THE COWS. He said he would expect Is 3d as an average payment for this and last month, though there would be further payments at the end of the season. He admitted that at Is 3d a lb. 16201 b. from 36 cows would represent £lOl. He would expect that from any ordinary dairy farm. He had previously: been working on a farm at Kapuni for four years. • He had saved the whole of his wages and had £1450 'n the bank. He was to have secured £ll5O from friends. Christie Brothers and Innes, the agents concerned. were not- engaged in getting the money for him. When he inspected the farm with Christie young Magan showed them the returns and took them over the farm. Youno Magan did not say, “If dad get another place to suit aim soon he is taking this off the market.” Nothing of the sort was mentioned; nor had Christie said. “Your father won’t: sell, then, unless he gets another farm?” Nor had young Magan said his father would be a “mug” if he sold without getting ’ another farm. Nor had :>is ''Crook’s) -brother replied, “Yes, there Would not be much sense in that.” Nor had Christie said “Well, there is nothing about that in his letter to us.” Nor had young Magan said, “Well that must have been a mistake and Mr. Innes knows it.” Young Magan impressed him as a very clean, honest fellow. To Mt. Reeves: Magan’s letter to the agents said the takings the previous season had been- £l4OO and from that Crooks had assessed his possible takings for the season. EVIDENCE OF AN AGENT. Norman Campbell Innes said he remembered receiving Magan’s letter giving particulars of the farm. He relied on” the letter as his authority to sell. He took a client to see the farm and Magan gave details of the last seasons. Magan stated. £1450 was his price, and be 'seemed anxious to sell. He asked about any farms the agents bad for sale. Nothing came of these negotiations, this client leaving for the Waikato. Witness did not see Magan again till after the. purchase by Crooks. He took the agreement for Magan’s signature, but Magan did not sign, for the reason that he never intended to sell unless he got another place first. Ho admitted he had forgotten to mention , that in his letter and. offered to pay: i expenses to get out of the deal with i-Crooks. Witness -said he opposed', they

could fix it Up somehow. Magan • appeared to anticipate trouble, as he said they could sue or do what they liked. Witness had no knowledge of h’s firm financing the purchase of the farm by Crooks. - * ;

Other evidence Os given by • John Christie, who. took Crooks, to see the farm, Young Magan had ,shown :them over the place, and. had told witness' that an agent named Bosley had been there and said he could get more money for the place. He said that if anyone came along ami offered more money he could have the place.Avondale Dunbar Gray, Okato, said he was the owner of the property. Magan had been his tenant for four years. He reduced the rent three years ago from £2 life to £2 5s an acre on account of low prices. Crooks saw him in June and told him he thought he had bought the place but could not get the occupier to complete. Crooks asked him if he was willing that the sale should take place as he considered Crooks was financially strong. When witness' shw Magan he said he was going to'complete; but said the opposite when next he’ saw him, his main reason being he- had'not ■ been suited with another place. 1 " ’ ■ ' This being the conclusion of the'case fbr Crooks, His Honour said he did dot sec, as ad 'ised'up to that - stage/ how the technical objections could -’be overcome. Even if it wei'e/aesunfed '‘the receipt” for the’ deposit- referred' ! to' the agreement and was signed by the agents of Magan, and that the two memoranda could ’be incorporated into one’ document,- the receipt wds'not signed by Magan."' Magah’s -letter merely authorised the. agent to introduce a purchaser and not to sell. He could not-see thiit it could be- taken as an authority ,to sell. : ■

, ■ Mr. Reeves admitted the whole case depended upon the construction placed on-the'letter'by His Honour.’ The first overture-was'from Magan to nis agent; ’-■His Honour: ’But. that is a different thing : from- giving the agent'authority to sign a contract to sell, The agent’s only duty wds to "take clients along, Magan: reserving'- the : 1 ight.'.to' 'sign' the contract. - ; <‘' i • :i : ’After further’ argument Mr. '-Reeves said he could only accept the ruling of the coiirt.

His .Honour said no further meaning could he construed from Magan’s letter than an authority to . find , a client. Therefore there was no authority givsin by Magan for the agent to sign a contract .to sell. ' It was clear that Crooks must be non-suited. Costs were allowed on the middle scale as on a claim for £3OO. with witnesses’ expenses and- disbursements. ■