MORGAN-WRIGHT CASE ONCE MORE

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 20190, 5 July 1928, Page 8

MORGAN-WRIGHT CASE ONCE MORE

FURTHER STEP IN PROTRACTED LITIGATION [ Per Pro** AabocXation. j WELLINGTON, July 3. The Appeal Court to-day heard the case, Douglas George Wright, of Winslow, farmer, v. Florence Jenny Myra Morgan, Florence Barbara Morgan, Harry Wright Morgan, Percy Norman Quartermain, Harriet Myra Wright ana William Nosworthy, all of Canterbury. This case involves further litigation arising out of the estate of Edward George Wright, deceased. By decision of the Privy Council given in connection with this estate in 1926, it was ordered, inter alia, that the above appellant, who had been one of the original trustees of the estate, was not entitled to purchase from the estate those properties known as Surrey Hills and Windermere (exclusive of Chapman’s block), which he had; in fact purchased, and that he was liable to account for the purchase moneys receive/! by him from sales made by him of part of these estates, and that he holds the balance of these estates upon trusts of the will of the testator. Subsequently an order was made by the Supreme Court that appellant should file the accounts of purchase money received or receivable from the sale of portions of the two properties and of the profits and income derived from his working of the properties, and lastly, further accounts setting out the interest payable by him on moneys owing from, time to time to the trust. Appellant then brought a summons for directions as to the taking of accounts and for the settling of the principles to be followed in renderingsuch accounts, and. by a decision of Mr Justice him, given in April last, it was ordered: (1) that appellant was not entitled to rely on tne sale alleged to have been made of Windermere to his motner and that he must account ior the purchase money of all parts thereof sold by him; (J) that he must account for the proceeds of those parts of Surrey Hills and Wima-ermere sold by him, whether the sales were completed by transfer or not; (3) that he must pay an occupation rent for those parts of the two properties from time to time unsold, calculated at certain rates of interest upon values place/! from time to time upon such parts by valuations made under the Valuation of Land. Act during a period extending irom February a. 2, IJU7, down to the conclusion of the occupation. Appellant is now appealing from the directions given by Mr Justice Sim on the grounus that the order and. directions are erroneous, both in fact and in law, and are contrary to the judgment of the Privy Council. For appellant Mr F. Sargent appeared, and tor the respondents Mr A. i. Donnelly. Mr Sargent said, he had decided to abandon his appeal so far as the sale of Windermere was concerned, and that he would carry his appeal solely against the Judge’s directions as to the basis on which the occupation rent should be calculated. Mr {Sargent, on behalf of the appellant, based his argument on two grounds: (1) that the levying of an occupation rent should not go beyond a period of seven years after the death of the testator, for the testator, by the terms of his will, clearly intended the property to be sold at the latest, at the end of that period; (2) that as the testator contemplated that a valuation should be made of the property and at that figure sold to one of his sons, the occupation rent should be calculated on this figure and noU on a varying Government valuation. Mr Donnelly, in reply, explained to the Court that Wright had failed to comply with the order of the Supreme Court to readier accounts, but had filed a summons for directions. Respondents had all along been entitled to the rental calculated on the actual value of the land as varying from time to time, but for the sake of concluding this lengthy litigation, had been willing to accept a rental based on the Government valuations, and Mr Justice Sim, considering this to be a fair thing, Had enboclied it in his ond-er. Being entitled to a greater amount, at least they were entitled to this amount. The Court reserved its decision.