Article image
Article image

Post Office had been duplicated. Mr W. J. King, for the defence, said that the offence had been entirely an innocent one. After the car had been returned to his client he had had new wheels and tyres fitted on, and the car had been used as a demonstration car. It had been sold as such. Instead of notifying the change of ownership he had re-registered the vehicle in the name of Peart. This practice was followed by many garage proprietors in_ ignorance of the Act, he added. Taking into consideration the fact that the case was the first of its kind to come before the Court in Hamilton, Their Worships ordered defendant to pay costs only.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/THS19290319.2.49

Bibliographic details

Thames Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 17579, 19 March 1929, Page 8

Word Count
117

Untitled Thames Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 17579, 19 March 1929, Page 8

Untitled Thames Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 17579, 19 March 1929, Page 8