With regard to the question of fraud, the condition on the policy is: "If the claim is in any respect fraudulent, or if any false declaration be made in support thereof, etc., eto.—all benefit under this Policy shall be forfeited." The plaintiff, A. Nastasheffsky, both before the arbitration and during the hearing of the casein Court when giving his evidence,, maintained that certain prices of goods destroyed were the cost price of the goods. At the commencement of the proceedings with regard to the claim, the plaintiff did describe the prices aa the "sale prices," but in the arbitration proceedings, having learnt that he could only claim on cost price of goods, he stated that the statement that they were the "sale prices" was a mistake of his lawyers, and that they were really the cost price. I am of opinion that these prices were in fact the sale prices and not the cost prices, and the plaintiff was well aware of that, fact, and that the plaintiff endeavoured to deceive both the Arbitrator and this Court. From' his award the arbitrator also appears to have disbelieved - the plaintiff's evidence with regard to the prices of the goods, and to have reduced the prices, alleged to have been the cost prices, to that which he considered the real cost price and made his award accordingly.
Consequently I am of opinion that ''a false declaration" having been made in support of the claim, the policy becomes forfeited under the conditions on the back of the
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.