CLAIM FOR £lOOO

Waikato Times, Volume 117, Issue 19600, 12 June 1935, Page 8

CLAIM FOR £IOOO

OPERATION OF FARMS.

FATHER AND SON AT LAW.

PAYMENT FOR SERVICES

AUCKLAND, Wednesday.

A claim and counter-claim arising out of a dispute between father and son over liability for £IOOO and the payment for the son’s services in the supervision of farm property in the Waikato district and the buying and selling of stock was heard before Mr Justice Fair in the Supreme Court yesterday. The plaintiff was Edward Allen, retired farmer, formerly of Cambridge, but now of Auckland (Mr North), and the defendant Clifford Thornton Allen, farmer, of Okoroire (Mr Grant). In his statement of claim plaintiff said it had been agreed .that £IOOO was to toe paid by defendant to him, provided that the sum should not be demanded before March 1, 1934. That amount or any part of it had not been paid, and was accordingly claimed from defendant.

By way of counter-claim, defendant said he had incurred £234 as expenses in attending to stock saies. in addition he claimed £SOO for the supervision of the farms and £625 for buying and selling stock. Although defendant contended that a total of £1359 was due to him, he was prepared to accept a cancellation of the debt of £IOOO. Case for Defencein opening, -.Mr Grant said that throughout" his life defendant had worked for his father, and in return plaintiff had promised ,to set him up on a farm and-stock it for him.' In 1920 plaintiff purchased a block of 560 acres of. land at Okoroire for. over £SOOO, and put it in his son’s name. In June, 1928,. however, the property was handed over to the defendant and he signed an agreement to pay his father £IOOO. In handing over the property, it was contended, the father had made a settlement for his son’s past services. In the same year the property adjoining of. 840 acres was purchased by plaintiff, in conjunction with two other persons. The land was subdivided, but difficulty ..was experienced in selling it. It was subsequently bought by defendant and his brother. ■

Counsel said that plaintiff was interested in about 1500 acres of farming lands, and shortly after the handing oyer of the Okoroire property he approached his son. He said he was advancing in years, and asked defendant if he would resume the supervision of his farms and attend to his,.stock dealings. If he would do so for about five years, plaintiff said he would be prepared to write off the £IOOO debt. This work was performed by defendant from June or July 1928, until July, 1933- Stock purchases and sales during that period involved a gross turnover of more than £25,000.

Evidence on the lines'outlined -by counsel was then given by defendant. For plaintiff, Mr -North said they came before His Honour with a written contract for the payment of £IOOO on a due date, and it was most dangerous to accept an oral arrangement set up to cancel the written agreement. Such a -claim must he most closely scrutinised. The father was now 87 years of age, and it was not denied that Clifford had helped him, but there would be evidence that Clifford never had authority to act for bis father. The Court adjourned for the hearing of further evidence.