NEW TRIAL GRANTED

Evening Post, Volume CXIV, Issue 122, 19 November 1932, Page 15

NEW TRIAL GRANTED

UNUSUALCIRCUMSTANCES "INTERFERENCE" WITH

In the Supreme Court on Thursday an order for a new.trial was made hy his Honour Mr, Justice Blair upon unusual grounds. The grounds were mis. conduct on the part.of the jury who heard tho case and on \he part of- a witnessi _ The action, which was tried before Mr. Justice Blair and a jury of twelve at Palmerston North last month, Was one in which Caroline Annie Forrest, of PalmarstOn North, claimed £2000 damages from Carl Peterson, of Poxton, on account of the death"of he* husband arising out of a collision on 7th July last. The jury found that both parties had been negligent, and that this was thp, cause of the accident Judgment was entered for Petersen, with leave reserved to the plaintiff to niovo for judgment of for a new trial. ; The plaintiff filed a motion for judgment, or, in the alternative, for a. new trial, and at the argument of this motion on. Thursday Mr. W. P. Rollings appeared for the plaintiff' and Mr. M. H. Oram' (Palmerston North) for tho defendant to oppose. Affidavits majle by two police constables were filed by the plaintiff, showing that during the second, day of tho trial, while tho jurors were viewing the defendant's motor-lorry in the Courthouse grounds, one of the ddfendant's,■ expert witneas.cs,, an assessor named William Lower'y, conversed with the jurors and demonstrated to them a plan he had made of the sceno of the accident. After some minutes' conversation with the jury,. 1/owery was observed by the* Registrar and ordered to leave. . '

; Counsel for the plaintiff- cited legal authorities to establish that if a communication is made, to, the jury, out of Court in such cil^Umstances ; aa .to give rise to .a "reasonable suspicion that it •may hav.o influenced the-verdict, tho "Court;.will giant a new trial without instituting an inquiry as to what Was actually the effect of the communication. ■ .'. ■'."'..■' . :

After indicating that he was unable to enter judgment for the plaintiff on the answers to. the issues, his- Honour said that in liis opinion there must be a new trial upon the ground of Lowery's interference with the jury. It "was important that the administration of justico should not only be fair, but also soem fair, and where there was a wellgrounded suspicion that the course, of justice'might have been improperly interfered with, as there was in this case, the Court would order a new trial.

An order was made accordingly for a new trial, with leave to either party to amend the pleadings. The question of costs was reserved.'. . ;