Judge C. $8. Lobingier gave a written judgment on the appeal of the Auto Castle v. Isaac Del-burge. His Honour stated in In the court below. appellee sued on the following instrument:—"I, the undersigned, hereby agree having settled the following transaction; 1.—Studdbaker special six Roadster against my Buick six Sedan and Shanghai Taels five hundred only (Ts. 500) payable on the 19th instant. (Signed) I. Delbourgo."" The Commissioner disposed of the case by applying the parol evidence rule which forms the chief subject of discussion in the briefs. But we find other controlling considerations. The answer admits the averments of the complaint and further alleges:—''l.—That on_ or about the 10th day of October, 1922, the plaintiff offered to the defendant one Studebaker special six Roadster motor car which they, the plaintiff, then and there falsely and fraudulently described to the defendant as a practically new motor car in excellent condition and good running order, that the same had been driven about three months over a distance of about 326 miles; that the tyres were in good condition and practically new. 2—That defendant relied upon the said representations of the plaintiffs and relying upon the same entered into an agreeMent referred to above."
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.