IMPORTANT APPEAL.

Hokitika Guardian, 14 July 1924, Page 4

IMPORTANT APPEAL.

Litigation of importance to eommerciiil men and motorists whs brought to a dost l at tile Court of Appeal in Wellington on 4th. iust.. when ;tii 1 was brought against an order made by Air .1 ustico MacGregor on the'';,sotting aside the verdict of a jury given in an action brought by \V. Ji. liiehirtison, garage proprietor. Kaikoura, against W. F. llinckwcl!, formerly manager and a director of Bilick Sales, Ltd.. Christchurch. On the Bench were the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout), Mr Justice ISim. Air Justice ilerdngtii, and Air Justice Reed.

Ur W. J. Hunter, of Christchurch, appeared for the appellant, and Mr AT. J. Grcsson and Air K. W. White, of Christchurch. for the respondent. The appeal was unanimously allowed. and an order made that judgment should be entered in the Supreme Court for the amount of the verdict of the jury. £514 i)s Bd. and costs. In tho Supreme Court the jury found that tho fraudulent misrepresentations alleged by the plaintiff had been made by the defendant against whom judgment was thereupon entered accordingly. The defendant moved for a nonsuit or alternatively for a new trial on the ground that the verdict was against the weight of evidence. __ Me Justice MacGregor was of the opinion that in arriving at the conclusion they did on the evidence, the jurv must in effect, have disregarded his directions to them as to the nature and burden of proof of fraud in an action in which it is sought to establish fraudulent misrepresentation. He accordingly made an order setting aside the judgment and granting a new trial bolero a common jury of twelve. From this order tlie plaintiff appealed. After hearing counsel the Court of Appeal orally gave judgment allowing the appeal.

His Honour the Chief Justice said ho was satisfied that there was a case to go to tho jury and that the order setting aside the verdict ol the jury should not have been made, lie briefly reviewed portions of the evidence, and said that rpiite apart from the telepdioiio conversation, there was some evidence to go to a jury, and that their verdict must not he dislurlied. liis Honour Air Justice Sim agreed that the verdict was one which twelve reasonable men could lilid. He quoted a dictum of Chief Justice Tiinlal. to the effect that the verdict of a jury should not he lightly set aside, and should only be sot aside where it was logically impossible to uphold it. Air Justice Reed delivered judgment to the same effect stating that there was evidence which apparently the jury believed to support their verdict and it must stand.

Judgment will he entered in the Supremo Court for the appellant, Richardson, accordingly.