WAIMATE.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXV, Issue 18948, 6 August 1931, Page 7

WAIMATE.

MAGISTRATE'S COURT. At Tuesday’s sitting of the Wafmate Magistrate’s Court the following defended civil cases were heard before Mr C. R. Orr-Walker, S.M.:— Rent Claim. John W. Manchester proceeded against L. C. and A. McLauchlan, for £SO Is, rent alleged to be due for shop premises in Queen Street. Defendants confessed an amount of £3O 9s 6d, the balance £l9 Us 6d, being submitted for legal interpretation of the lease. Mr T. A. Wilson appeared for plaintiff, and Mr C. W. Webber for defendants. Mr Wilson said that defendants were the lessees of premises from plaintiff. On November 24th last, the Arm of McLauchlan’s, Ltd., had gone into liquidation, and the £3O 9s 6d owing up to that time was admitted. Until the fourth of March following, the liquidator had been in possession, and the rent had been reduced to £3 15s week. The claim included 5/- difference in rent as set out by the lease. From the fourth of March to first of April the premises had been vacant, when they had been re-let, without defendants’ consent, which was tantamount to legal eviction. Claim was also made for the time that the premises were vacant. Mr Webber said that the submission for the defence was that the dealings of the lessor with the liquidator without reference to McLauchlan Bros., the lessees, automatically terminated the lease, being analagous to the position which arose if a mortgagee ignored a mortgagor and had dealings with the purchase of the property from the mortgagor. About ninth of March last the key of the premises had been taken away by the agent of the landlord, and It had never been returned. On March 20th the lessees had been requested to remove the sign the company had in the window, and on the next day the new tenant put in a notice that he was taking over the premises. Mr Webber submitted that surrender was on the ninth or the twentieth of March if it was held the lease was not terminated on November 24, when negotiations had been made with the liquidator. Evidence was given by Leonard Cameron McLauchlan, one of the defendants, and d’Auvergne Stanley Grut, the liquidator. Mr Wilson said the question was from which date were the original lessees deemed to be discharged from obligation to pay the rent under the lease of £4 a week. He suggested it would be from the time the premises were re-let on April Ist, 1931, when the tenants had been legally evicted. He submitted there was no eviction before that, only negotiations had been going on. Mr Webber said the landlord had agreed to accept £3 15s so long as the liquidator was on the premises, and this was, in effect, a new arrangement which in law would discharge the lessees from the original liability, as in the case of mortgagee, mortgagor and purchaser from mortgagor. After November 24th, then, there was no obligation on the lessees’ to pay, as the lease had had been broken. Mr Wilson contended that in law the position alleged by Mr Webber could not arise as between lessor and lessee. Decision was reserved, the Magistrate remarking that the points of law were involved. Rent of Section. James Meehan and Sons, Ltd. (Mr W. Boland), sued G. D. Craig, Makikihi (Mr C. W. Webber) for £2O 6s Bd, being balance allegedly due for rent of a section at Makikihi. Defendant counter-claimed for £l9 ss, the amount which defendant had to pay to H. Judge to retain possession of a 4-acre paddock which it was alleged was included in the premises leased by plaintiff to defendant. The evidence showed that Craig wasgiven the right to graze the adjoining four-acre paddock under the original agreement for the whole property. Tire lease held by Maddren Bros, had been sold to a man named Geaney, who had later sold to Harry Judge. Meehan having been a sub-lessee Under Maddren Bros. With the selling of the lease, Craig had dealt with the respective holders for the use of the paddock, and he claimed for the deduction of the amount paid. £l9 5s from the rental claim by Meehan, which rental claim was admitted. In asserting that it appeared that legally Craig had no standing, the Magistrate said in equity and good conscience there should be a set-off against plaintiff’s claim of 3/- a week, the amount that plaintiffs’ would have to pay had Maddren Brps. occupied the section on the same terms. James Meehan agreed in Court to the set-off as suggested, amounting tb a total of £ll ss; and judgment was given for plaintiff for £B, plus £1 Is 8d paid into Court, with £2 6s costs.