Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Association Must Approve Sale

14th February 1936
Page 49
Page 49, 14th February 1936 — Association Must Approve Sale
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

IN the Chancery Division, last week, Mr. Justice Luxmoore decided an action between bus proprietors in the Potteries. It was brought by Baxter (Hanley), Ltd., against Mr. Alfred McMinn, of Burslem, who held licences from the West Midland Traffic Commissioners to run three buses between Longton and Tunstall and for tours and excursions in the district.

The plaintiff claimed damages for alleged breach of an agreement of September 3, 1932, by the defendant to sell his business and garage equipment for £7,000.

Mr. McMinn asserted that it was a condition precedent to the sale that the plaintiff should become a member c the North Staffs Motor Omnibus Proprietors Association, and counterclaimed for rectification of the contract by the insertion of words which, he said, represented the true bargain between the parties.

The plaintiff denied that the sale agreement was subject to any suds condition.

• It CMS explained that the North Staffs Association, of which Mr. McMinn was a member, by a deed of 1929, prohibited, under severe penalties, any member from selling his business, except to a member and with the approval of the Association.

Mr. Joseph Thomas Baxter, of the plaintiff company, denied that he was aware of the existence of the deed or its contents when the sale agreement was entered into. He admitted that he knew he would have to sign a compensation pooling agreement with the Association, but said he did not think it was necessary to became a member in order to do so.

Mr. McMinn declared that the effect of the deed was frequently discussed between, him and Mr. Baxter, and that he made it plain to Mr. Baxter that if -the sale were to go through, he must join the Association and execute the deed and the pooling agreement. He stated, aad called witnesses to prove, that Mr. Baxter was present at meetings of *the Association, when the effect of the deed was fully explained and discussed.

His Lordship said Ise was satisfied that Mr, Baxter knew of the existence of the deed before the sale agreement was entered into, and held that it was an essential condition of the contract that the plaintiff Company should join the Association and execute the deed and the pooling agreement. The action was dismissed with costs. • With regard to the counterclaim, his Lordship held that as there was no question of specific performance, this was unnecessary, and be dismissed it with costs, ordering a set-off With respect to the costs.


NOWthat the conversion of Honister Pass into a motor road is nearing completion, several concerns are planning excursions by that route. Applications are to be heard by the Northern Traffic Commissioners, on Wednesday next, February 19. For many years excursions over the pass have been operated by horsed-coach, the last of its type to run regularly in the Lake District.

comments powered by Disqus