SHIPMENT AND DELIVERY

Taranaki Daily News, 18 November 1930, Page 9

SHIPMENT AND DELIVERY

TERMS OF OIL CONTRACT

ECHO OF MECCA FRAUD CASE.

CLAIM AGAINST THE CREDITORS.

By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. An echo of the recent criminal case in which “Mecca” oil figured was heard at the Supreme Court, when an originating summons was brought before Mr. Justice Reed to determine the ownership of oil valued at between £5OO and £6OO. The question at issue was whether oil purchased by Morton Parker Pimcntal in thj course of his transactions had passed to him or whether it was still owned by the Socony Proprietary, Ltd., Melbourne. . Much of the legal argument was directed towards the interpretation of the following clause in the contract: Shipment of goods to constitute delivery, and each shipment to be deemed as a s-.’. arate contract.” Mr. Treadwell, with him Mr. James, appeared for Begg and Wakefield, judgment creditors of Pimental, Mr. E. Parry for Coulls, Somerville and Wilkie, also judsment creditors of Pimental, and Mr. E. H. Hadfield for the Socony Proprietary, Ltd. It was stated by Mr. Treadwell that there were no cases in _C.I.F. cases in which such a term as “shipment of goods to constitute delivery” appeared. His Honour asked, “have you searched American cases?” - ’ , Mr. Treadwell replied that the contract was an English contract and prepared m New Zealand. vr nri . After hearing legal argument His Honour reserved his decision.