TRIAL BY SPECIAL JURY

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Volume 81, Issue 47, 18 November 1937, Page 6

TRIAL BY SPECIAL JURY

-Press Association.)

Wellington Civil Action JUDGE GRANTS APPLIGATION

(By Telegraph-

WELLINGTON, Last Night. Delivering judgment in the case of the New , Zealand Creditmen 's Association (Wellington), Ltd., v. Dun'a Ageney (Wellington), Ltd., and another, the Chief Justice, Sir Michael Myers, said he understood that it was the first application since the passing of last year's legislation for the trial of an aetion before . a special jury. Thatthat legislation limited cases in which an order for trial before a special jury might be made was undoubted, and it became neeessary to consider the nature and extent of suck limitation. His Honour said it would appeai tkat tke law as it existed before 1930 kad been altered in two respects: first, except wkere tke parties -consented'^ it limited the cases in wkick a special jury migkt be granted to tkose in wkick, in the opinion of tke judge,' a knowledge of business, mercantile, or banking matters was. required; and. secondly, tkat knowledge must be acquired "on tke part of the jury." In tke case before kim, wketker expert evidence was neeessary or not, practically every question involved — ' tke meaning of business terms, fair comment, malice, and even tke querition of damages — in kis opinion required for its determination a knowledge of business or mercantile matters and practices on tke part of tke "jury. He did not suggest tkat in every action between business men for damages for libel or slander -the question of fair comment, malice, or damages would require such knowledge on the part of tke jury, s but ke was clearly of ppinion tkat suck knowledge was required ln tkat case. Si His Honour made a-n order for a trial before a special jury of 12 subject to tke condition relating to tkeir selection made neeessary by tke activities of tke parties.