“CLOWN” MACHINE.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXIV, Issue 927, 23 November 1933, Page 8

“CLOWN” MACHINE.

Purchase of Game Leads to Court Case. PLAINTIFFS NON-SUITED. Per Press Association. AUCKLAND, November 22. A claim of £3OO damages for fraudulent misrepresentation was brought by Austin Harry Paul and Frank D. Menzies (Mr Dickson) against Noah Cohen (Mr Bagnall), before Mr Justice Smith in the Supreme Court. The action arose out of the alleged purchase by plaintiffs of defendant’s share in a game known as a “ clown ” machine. The statement of claim set out that through the defendant’s agent, plaintiffs purchased an interest in the “ clown ” machine for £3OO. It was alleged that there had been fraudulent misrepresentation in that defendant had represented that the machine was patented in New Zealand, that the machine was a true reproduction of the one used in England, and that it did not contravene the Gaming Act, that defendant suppressed the fact that the machine had been brought from Sydne\*, where it had been declared illegal, and that he also concealed his knowledge that the police were contemplating proceedings under the Gaming Act in respect of thy* use of the machine. The defence denied that the plaintiffs had agreed to purchase the defendant’s interest in the machine, and that defendant had ever employed an agent to sell his interest in the machine.

After evidence had been heard plaintiffs were non-suited.