A Coronation Sect Case.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXX, Issue 37, 11 September 1902, Page 2

A Coronation Sect Case.

Although there must have been dozens of squabbles between the owners and the hirers of seats for a view of the Coronation procession in London, which, it will be remembered, did not come off as first arranged, it is rather remarkable that only one of the disputes found its way into court, and in that case the terms of the bargain were so clear and explicit as to make it impossible for the Judge to do other than decide in favor of the plaintiff's claim for a refund of the money he had paid. Fortunately, however, the Judge went out of his way to express hts opinion as to the legal position of those \\ho had purchased seats withont making any specific agreement with the owners as to what was to be done if the procession did not eventuate, and as the point is one of general and practical interest, we give our readers the particuhrs of the case.

The plaintiff, Frank Hyland, sued A. J. Moss at South' wark County Court, to recover £2 3s, the price of three seats

for the Coronation procession for Friday, June 27, sold on the condition that the money should be returned if no procession. The evidence showed that Mr. Bolton, solicitor, went to the defendant's shop with the plaintiff and they agreed to purchase three seats from which to view the procession. A receipt was made out in the following terms and signed by the defendant : ' Received of Mr. Frank Hyland £3 3s for three seats in front of doorway for the Coronation procession on Friday next, the money to be returned if no procession.' When it was found that there was to be no procession, Hyland offered to allow Moss 10 per cent, of the purchase money as compensation, but the latter refused the offer and demanded 50 per cent. His Honor gave judgment as follows : ' If a person merely gives £3 3s to another and says there is to be a procession which you know of and I know of, and if you allow me to sit here on that day you can have the £3 3s. a difficult question might arise as to the inference to be drawn. It is not like paying the manager of a theatre to see a play or an opera, because there the manager has some control over the performance, and if it does not come off one is entitled to his money back on the plea that the consideration wholly failed from him. But in view of this receipt the difficult question of law does not arise. Still, I am of opinion that no money paid for seats is recoverable except there is such a contract as this.' Judgment for the plaintiff for three guineas and costs. The Judge evidently held that a person who purchases a seat for a ' show ' over which the vendor of the seat has no control takes all risks as to the possibility of the ' show ' not eventuating, unless he makes a specific agreement with the vendor on the matter. This is the age of demonstrations and processions, and the public might find it worth while therefore to make make a note of this point for future guidance and use.