CLAIM ON TRUCKS.

Waikato Times, Volume 109, Issue 18339, 27 May 1931, Page 8

CLAIM ON TRUCKS.

THE RIGHT OF SALE; INTERESTING LEGAL 6ASE. tiEGISIGN RE'SEftVEilln the Magistrate’s Court yesterday,' before Mr Wyvern WilsAn,- S.;M.y Fred Baker Limited, Hamilton, claimed from V. H. Zimmerman’ of Te Ruiti; an amaunt of £3OO allegedly hu.e under an instrument by way df Security executed in favour of thh plkiritiff company. The defendant . admitted ah amount of approximately £r39tJ owing to the plaintiff cornp'dhy. Silt denied that the amount was actually due and payable. Default having been made by the defendant under the instrument by way of security the plaintiff, by Its agents, seized three motor trucks, the Subject of the security, and sold Ahern in pursuance of the comjjjfiy’s ppwef 6f sale as provided by the Instrument; The trucks Were! sola at public auction and realised ah amount of £66. The plaintiff ebriipany claimed the difference between the amohnt of £66’ and the amount payable under the instrument by way, of security, includingthe expenses_ of seizure and other incidental expenses. Legal argument developed on the paint as tb whether it is permissible for a mortgagee of chattels to buy in at a sale by publ‘£ auction, Without the Sale beirig conducted by the Registrar of the Supreme Court.; „ Mr E. M. Mackersey for the defendant contended that Such a Sale must be conducted by the Registrar of the Supreme Court and supported, his argument by references to ‘‘The Land Transfer Act ’’ and “ The Property Law Act,” with relation to a mortgagee’s sale of land. Mr W. J. King for the plaintiff argued that in strict terms ,of the implied covenant in “ The Chattels Transfer Act” a. mortgagee could buy; id at such sale, that the reason why lailfl was invariably .sold through the Registrar of the Supreme Court where a mortgagee desired to buy in was because of the difficulties of the execution of a legal deed of conveyance or memorandum of transfer of the land. A" mortgagee could not sell to himself and It ,\vas necessary to obtain the execution of the necessary deed by the Registrar of the Supreme Court to enable the mortgaged to become the registered proprietor. In the case, of chattels the matter was different ; no formal deed of conveyance was necessary and goods could be transferred by delivery. In the present case delivery was made by thp auctioneer to the highest bidder whicn in this case was the. mortgagee. Section 19 of "The Property Law Act" provided that a person could deliver property to himself and property included chattels.

A further point Involved In the argument was whether the full amount under the bill 6'f sale was' actually due and payable. On all points the Alagistrate reserved decision.