Judge in Same Position as Others: An Option Governed by Earlier Lease In _H. M. Supreme Court, on Thursday, E, Ezra & Ca. sued A. J. Watson for Tls. 800, rent due. Mr.
Tycho Wing appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. K. E, Newman for defendant, Mr, Newman said that only the question of costs was at issue and he asked for pleadings and permission to defend. At the time the writ was issued there was a perfec! Ly good defence. Since the writ was issued the amount claimed had been paid into Court, the defendant arguing that it was not due unt the end of the month, so therefore it was unnecessary to take legal action and the plaintiffs should be held responsible for the costs. The dispute was 4s to whether the rent was payable on the first or the last day of the month.
Die Judge—I don't know whether it is a recognized rule here that rent, must be paid in advance. I know that I have to pay mine beforehand.
Mr. Wing—It is in the agreement} in this case.
Mr. Newman called J. H. Solomon, who said that he was @ partner in the Shanghai Stores. In his opin-fon there was a good defence to the action. It was his idea that the rent only was due at the end of the month.
Cross-examined—Previously they had a lease and under that the rent was to be paid at the beginning of the month. The lease expired and then they took advantage of an option to continue in occupation. but} they did not sign a fresh lease.
"s was bad and he did not there was an obligation to Pay until the end of the month.
The Judge said that no defence had been made out. When the devridant took advantage of the option there appeared not to be any agrecment as to different terms and 39 it must be considered that the con-ions of the lease remained effective. There would be judgment for the amount claimed, with costs against the defendant.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.