IMPORTANT TO BROKERS.

Inangahua Times, Volume V, Issue 39, 3 June 1878, Page 2

IMPORTANT TO BROKERS.

In the else of Walker v. Morknno iv which tho plaintiff sued for #17.17* Gd and oosts, for tho non-dolivory of a parcol of sharos. Mr Mansford, It.M. Nt P ( »rt Chalmors, delivored tho following judgs jmenh .rocontly .— " Oonsi loring as Xdo jthat tho Kosidont Magistrate's Court is •ono of equity and good oousoience, and Uliii't it is not altogether strictly bound by ;lognl ovidouoo, I am of opinion that tho ; plnintif^ in this case is entitled to recovor itbo'nmolitit suod for. Whothor tho plaintiff aotod as principal or agent, .is in this 'instance immaterial, thou«h my opinion is i that he can only bo lookod upoii in tho ;li«'l\tofa broker as agent for the defendant. It is clear that somo negotiations took placo botweon tho parties prior to tho'dato of tho tolograra produood, and that tho result of tho. negotiation*! was "the transmission of tiio felogrJftn from tho plaintiff to tlie dofondtint, that' ho could sell' ibe Bds. sharoo at 4i por shko, foi. .lowed by tho reply of tho defendant^.** howoi^ld tako a fijtod sum eloar for tlioT^ This of" itsolf woulcl not" havo completed tbo contrtiot, but at a' subsequent interview botwoort tliom, on Iho erimo day, I, am of opinion that tho coniVnot was pom feot, and that tho scrip for sharos would havo" thon and thoro been handed over to thin plaintiff had it" boon fii tho poqsossion of dofondani. It so happonod- that the scrip was in tho handa of a third party, and that Iho defendant actually called upon ?lmt third party to obtain tho flame. The' only fair construction to bo put upon' this is,'that had iio obtninod tho sharos he would havo completed his oon'traot with tho plaintiff. " Tho third party boing away from home provontod tbo Jdofondant got* ting possession of : tho. scrip nnd it appears to mo that tho' defendant, in tho moantimo ascortaining that tho shares woro rising in tho market^ and, having sold thorn' at a larger prico than ho gavo, and having to piirehaso other ah'aros to Wko good thoso which ho wasonititled.to rocoivo from tho dofondant, I think tho dofondnnt should pay thb loss occasioned tho plaintiff, ' Judgmont for tbo plaintiff £17 7s 6^ and oosts, ' , > .