Sydney Morning Herald (NSW : 1842 - 1954), Thursday 12 April 1923, page 6


.;.-.- SUPREME COURT.

v , BANCO JURY COURT.

in, (Before Sir Wm. Cullen, C.J., and juries.)

[j'; . s -y" CLAIM ON PROMISSORY NOTE.

in i Kennedy v Burnett.

a ',-;.-"?:.-.. The plaintiff, John Kennedy, sued in this asVillain tion to recover £251 from A. H. Burnett, toil gether with interest, in connection with a ! i it's dishonoured promissory note. Plaintiff stated P.Wi that he, with others, was a creditor of R.

T"?'.-? O. Cowlishaw, who had assigned his estate for ';'??-?-? the benefit of his creditors, and the defendant, '!'.?;. ; In consideration of his (plaintiff's) refraining '!'. from instituting proceedings to make Cowll

ii: Shaw bankrupt, gave the promissory note sued ,.,'??" upon. In his pleas the defendant stated that

the promissory note was given to the plain'a time In consideration that he would institute

proceedings to bring about the bankruptcy, yet the plaintiff would not nor did Institute .'' .'. such proceedings. Mr. Abrahams (instructed .'. by Messrs. John Williamson and Sons) ap

';., peared for the plaintiff; and Mr. Boyce and a Mr. Gee (instructed by Messrs. Dowling, Tay- ter, and McDonald) for the defendant.

.-:.. . :. The jury returned a verdict for the plain-:.- staff for 250. A stay of proceedings was

granted on the customary terms.

''K',. A PICTURE PLAY CONTRACT.

J' Shirley v Higgins.

2.''.'",..'." "The plaintiff in this notion, Arthur Shirley,

V " an actor, sued Ernest Henry Higgins claimV Sing £1000 compensation for alleged breach of 'a?.' ' "'Eli agreement, and for the detention of corof rain films and plates In connection with a -is., projected motion picture production entitled as v, The Throwback" or "The Comeback." Plain"..:'''!.! that stated that it was agreed between them - 'Vilna and the defendant should carry out the pho, it.' ' tographic part of the picture, and he (plan?'.. , pf /tiff) should perform his part in the acting

? -.. essential to its completion, in accordance with ?-.?; "as term in the contract, and that all moneys

necessary for the preparation and production ','??'.. tot the picture should be provided by the de

.; _' fendant, to a maximum amount of £600. There ..'....woro other provisions in the contract refer',,"".'. ring to the division of profits, etc., and de-ll! fendant complained that while he was always

.!' .".'^S'eady and willing to perform the contract !?:]' on his part, the defendant failed to carry

'as?; 'I"." out his undertaking. Defendant filed a doV,:,, tailed defence denying the plaintiff's oilsis' . 'rations, and alleging that the arrangement ':;.,*.;,.,'.made between them had been departed from '4! by the plaintiff without his (defendant's)

'Fiji consent In writing. Mr. Mack, K.C., and Mr. »jj Collins ('instructed by Messrs. Slade and Train) appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr. R'. Windeyer, K.C., and Mr. Jaques (instructed half .. :. by Mr. R. J. M. Foord for the defendant. Up The eased part heard.