SAME EVIDENCE—OPPOSITE VERDICTS

Chronicle (Levin), 10 July 1946, Page 2

SAME EVIDENCE—OPPOSITE VERDICTS

Press Assn.

By Telearavh .

-Covyright

WELLINGTON, July 9. Tho fact of opposite verdicts liaving been l'ouiid by two different jurics 011 substuutiully ideutieal cvidonce did not impoae upon the Court tho dutv of exerchsing tlie functions of a jury and of deeiding the aetions 011 their inerits, said the Chief Justice, Sir Michael Mvors, in the eour.se of a judgmeut delivered in the Court of Appoal yesterday. His Ilonour was coiniuenting on Ihe i'aet tliat the owner of one horsc which was involved aloug with anotlier liorse in a car aecident at Feilding secured a verdict for dainages against the driver of the car, yot- the othcr jury had just bel'ore found for the car driver when t.he oM'uer of the seeond liorse sought dainages, produciug alinost identical evideuce. Frnest James Lane, settler, of Carterton, and owner of the liorse C0111rade, which was injurcd in the aecident, had uppeaJed against the iuotion i'or a new triul granted by tiie Judge in the Supreine Court to the defendant, Jumes McKerchor McDonald, of Feilding, dairy coiupaiiy nianager, after a niajority verdict of the jury had found in favour of the jilaintiff Lane. The Chief Justice and M i'. Justice Fair dclared in their judgnients that the appeal should be allowed, enlitling the appellant Lane to retain the jury's verdict. M r. Justice Cornish dissented, lnaintaining that the failure of the .jury to fiud that the stable boy in charge oi' Conirade and the other liorse, Magic Chief (Avhieh was killed J, had been guilty of contributory negligence, was wrong. The niajority judginent of Ihe Court of Appoal also dismissed the eruss appeal by McDonald against the refusal of the Judge in the Supreine Court to nonsuit the plaiutiff or to cnter judgmeut for him.