No corrections yet
(Before the Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Pring,
and Mr. Justice Harvey.)
A THEATRICAL DISPUTE.
Shirley v Willoughby.
Mr. Blacket, K.C., and Mr. Wyndham Davies, instructed by Mr. A. B. Davies, ap- peared for appellant (defendant); and Mr. Win. M. Daley, for tho plalntirt, in support of tho verdict appealed against. Tho action, xvhlch was tried beforo Mr. Justlco Sly and a Jury of four, at the last Jury sittings, was brought by Arthur Shirley, actor, against George Willoughby, to recover compensation, under a declaration In which ho set out that V, hilo he was undor engagement to J. C. Williamson, Ltd., the defendant, knowing that tho contract xvith that theatrical firm xvas In full force and effect, unlawfully Induced J. C. Williamson, Ltd., to break tho contract.
The jury returned a verdict for the plain- tiff, with damages £500, and defendant now asked the Court to set aside this finding on a number of grounds.
When the hearing was resumed, the Chief Justlco said it "appeared to him that the caso was one In which the parties might possibly como to an arrangement.
Counsel then consulted together, and it xvas subsequently announced that the caso had been settled on terms filed In Court.
It xvas therefore struck oui.
ACTION TO RECOVER DEPOSIT.
Duncan v Mell.
Mr. Loxton, K.C., and Mr. Boyce, Instructed by Mr. E. W. Warren, appeared for appellant
(defendant), and Mr. W. A. Walker and Mr. P. H. Rogers, instructed by Mr. S. J. O'Hal loran, of Tamworth (by his agont, Mr. R. H. Lovlen), for tho plaintiff. The action, xvhlch xvas tried beforo Mr. Justice Sly aud a jury of four on June 25 last, was brought by James Duncan, grazier, of Barraba, against Charles F. Moll, to recover a deposit of £100 paid by plaintiff in respect of n purchase by him from tho defendant of a settlement lease. Certain objections xvero taken at tho trial as to tho admlsslbillty of certain evidence, and his Honor, by consent, formally directed the jury to return a verdict for the plaintiff In tho amjunt claimed, reserving liberty to the defendant to move the Full Court to enter the verdict for him or to grant a non-
The Court, after hearing argument, said that it became impossible to carry out the contract becauso of the refusal of tho Minis- ter for Lands to consent to the assignment of tho settlement lease, and the question was whether that difficulty had boen brought about by something for which' plaintiff was responsible. Having power under tbo refer- ence to draw Inferences from the facts, the Court had come to tho conclusion that on tho eyielenco tho plaintiff, by his own act, rendered it impossible to complete tho con- tract, and, theroforo, defendant was entitled to retain the deposit. The verdict for plain- tiff must be set aside and entered for de- fendant, with costs of tho present, motion.