Slike strani
PDF
ePub

new evidence has sometimes been allowed to be a ground for a new trial. But generally, the fact that a party was unprepared with evidence; that a material witness was absent; and that evidence was not given that might have been given, are not deemed to be sufficient grounds for a new trial.

(9.) Misdirection and the improper reception or rejection of evidence are good grounds for the granting of a new trial, if substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has been thereby occasioned (Order XXXIX., Rule 6; and Order LXXIX., Rule 7, C.C.). These are also grounds of appeal (51 & 52 Vict. c. 43, § 120).

(10.) The onus of proving that misdirection did not cause a miscarriage of justice lies on the party resisting the application for a new trial.

(11.) If an error or mistake be made in deciding the right to begin, if a manifest wrong has been occasioned thereby, it is deemed to be a ground for a new trial.

Application for New Trial.-(1.) The application for a new trial, or to set aside proceedings, may be made and determined on the day of trial if both parties be present, or it may be made at the first court next held after twelve clear days from day of trial.

(2.) If made after the day of trial, the party intending to make application for new trial must, seven clear days before the holding of the court, deliver to the registrar at his office, and also give the opposing party by serving it on him personally or leaving it at his place of abode or place of business, a notice in writing, signed by himself or his solicitor, of such intention, stating therein

shortly the grounds of the application (Order XXXI., Rule 1A, C.C.).

(3.) But, although the party has omitted to give notice in time, the Judge may, in his discretion, entertain an application for a new trial. The right of notice may be waived by the opposite party.

(4.) The notice does not operate as a stay to proceedings, unless the Judge so orders; but the money paid into court under any execution or order, and not paid out when notice was given, must be retained to abide the result of the application, or until the Judge otherwise orders. If no application is made, the money, if required, must be paid to the party in whose favour the order was made, unless the Judge otherwise directs.

(5.) If the notice be not duly given, or the application be not made at the court mentioned in the notice, no application for a new trial or to set aside proceedings can be subsequently made, unless by leave of the Judge, on such terms as he may think fit (Order XXXI., Rule 1A, C.C.).

(6.) An order made on application for a new trial is final; the Judge cannot entertain a second application.

(7.) In granting a new trial, the Judge may make it a condition that it shall take place before a jury, although the former trial was not (Order XXXI., Rule 2, C.C.).

(8.) On a new trial either party may demand a jury, although there was no jury on the first trial.

Costs.-(1.) If a new trial is granted on payment of costs, which are afterwards paid, the party accepting them is precluded from objecting to the

order. The Judge has the same power over the costs in a new trial as in the first.

(2.) Should the Judge require a bond to be given by either party, the expense of it must be borne by the party giving it (51 & 52 Vict. c. 43, § 108). See also Security.

Appeals.-Under the County Courts Act, 1888, an appeal lies against the order of the Judge granting or refusing a new trial. (1.) The ground of appeal appears to be "the determination or direction of the Judge on a point of law or equity." Therefore to give rise to an appeal, the Judge in granting or refusing a new trial must have misapplied either law or equity.

(2.) If the Judge grants or refuses a new trial applied for, merely on the ground that the verdict is against the weight of evidence, no appeal will lie unless the Judge misapplies the law in determining the question before him.

(3.) The Court may, on an appeal by a plaintiff against an order for a new trial, order judgment to be entered for defendant.

(4.) The time for giving notice of appeal is twenty-one days from the order granting or refusing a new trial.

(5.) It appears that the time will run from the final disposing of an action; if after leave to move, it was refused, the time for appeal will be from the day of refusal.

(6.) If the Judge reserves leave to move, the party dissatisfied may at once appeal to the High Court, and need not move in the county court.

Staying Execution.-(1.) If the Judge at any time is satisfied that a defendant in any action is unable

from sickness or other sufficient cause to pay and discharge the debt or damages recovered against him, or instalment thereof, he may, in his discretion, suspend or stay any judgment, order, or execution for such time and on such terms as he may think fit, and so on from time to time until it shall have appeared that the temporary cause of the disability has ceased; or he may order the discharge of any debtor who, on account of sickness, insanity, or other sufficient cause, ought in the opinion of the Judge to be discharged (51 & 52 Vict. c. 43, § 153; Form 159).

(2.) The Court has power of staying execution pending a new trial, and pending appeal; but otherwise than above the County Courts Act, 1888, contains no express power to stay proceedings, except under Order VIII., Rules 2, 3, and 4, C.C.

(3.) It is, however, contended that a County Court Judge might stay proceedings in his own court, in any case in which, if the action were in the High Court, an order to stay proceedings might be made.

APPENDICES.

A. PEACEFUL PICKETING.

IN a trial at the Manchester Assizes, July 14th, 1876, of a case of outrage at Bolton, Mr. Baron Bramwell said: "He wished to say nothing against trade unions-if he were a working man he thought he should belong to one of them. . . There was no harm in 'picketing' if they conducted it so as not to terrify people; but that they should interfere by violence to prevent a man following employment in the way he thought most for his own benefit, and in doing which he did them no wrong or injustice, was the most intolerable piece of tyranny he knew of. It must be severely punished. He wished to give them a word of friendly warning; he advised them to let their fellow-workmen be as free as they themselves would desire freedom-to make no attempt to enslave them against their liking or inclination."-Bury Times, July 15th, 1876.

A case of " picketing," in connection with the engineers' strike at Erith, was tried before Mr. Baron Huddlestone, on the same date, at Maidstone Assizes; the charge involved intimidation and molestation. The learned Judge, after referring to the Acts of 1875, said: "The law was now perfectly fair and equal as to masters and men. You have a right to arrange your own terms of working, but you have no right by unlawful means to combine to impose restrictions upon others. . . to compel others to abstain from working. . . . Under the Act a mere combination to effect a fair trade object is not a criminal conspiracy; but to combine together to do unlawful acts is to commit a criminal offence." Condensed from The Times, July 15th, 1876. Both of those cases were subsequent to the passing of the Labour Laws, 1875.

...

« PrejšnjaNaprej »