WARD v. BANK OF NEW ZEALAND.
.4, JUDGES DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE BANK, (PER UNITED PRESS ASSOCIATION). "Wellington, August 10. At the Supreme Court in Ba>ioe this j afternoon, argument in the case of Ward v. Bank of New Zealand was taken. The plaintiff, Mr Joseph Ward, of Blenheim, sued tbe defendant Bank for the sum of £55,000 damages on two alternative accounts. It appeared that one Gibson was a lessee of plaintiffs for a term of years of several runs on the Clarence Siver. In consideration of moneys advanced at various terms, Gibson mortgaged his interest in a run and the sheep thereon to the Bank, by a deed, the construction of whioh is now in dispute. Mr Ward contends that the mortgage is by way of assignment, and that therefore tbe Bank being the assignees are liable for all breaches of covenants contained in the original lease. The Bank contends that the deed is by way of underlease only, and that therefore they are not liable as as« signeeSi Mr Ward brought his action for breaohes of ooveuants, and for loss of sheep by scab, through the negligence oi tho Bank, to the number of 20,000 ; also that rabbits have been allowed to increase. There is also a general allegation that the Bank has broken all the covenants contained in the lease in question. After argument, their Honors, the Chief Justice and Mr Justice Bichmond, decided in favour of the Bank, that as the claim was brought no cause of action was shown by plaintiff, who v/as mulcted in £31 costs. Mr Travers, for plaintiff, obtained leave to amend his particulars of the claim. The case of the Bank v. Ward, for a large sum of money, has yet to be taken. „____________
Permanent link to this item
WARD v. BANK OF NEW ZEALAND., Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XXIX, Issue 11265, 11 August 1886
WARD v. BANK OF NEW ZEALAND. Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XXIX, Issue 11265, 11 August 1886
Using This Item
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.