Orr v Holmes [1948] HCA 16

Orr v Holmes [1948] HCA 16

The appeal should be allowed because the fresh evidence, even if accepted, could have been obtained at the time of trial with reasonable diligence, and it went only to credibility on the date rather than defeating the substance of the plaintiff's case. It was not such as to make a different result likely enough to justify setting aside the verdict. Costs could be ordered by a differently constituted court if expressly reserved.

Parties
Appellant; Plaintiff: Joseph Orr; Respondent; Defendant: Isaac Cecil Holmes; Respondent; Defendant: Edith Allison Clark
Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal (from Supreme Court of Queensland) / High Court Appeal From Full Court's Order for New Trial
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Orders of Full Court set aside; judgment for plaintiff restored.
Legal Topics
New Trial on Ground of Fresh Evidence, Lottery Syndicates, Appeal Against New Trial Order, Costs After Judge's Death
Civil Procedure Evidence New Trial on Ground of Fresh Evidence Lottery Syndicates Appeal Against New Trial Order Costs After Judge's Death

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Orr

Appellant; Plaintiff

Isaac Cecil Holmes

Respondent; Defendant

Edith Allison Clark

Respondent; Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (from Supreme Court of Queensland) / High Court Appeal From Full Court's Order for New Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a new trial should have been ordered based on discovery of fresh evidence after the verdict
  2. 2 Whether the fresh evidence could have been obtained with reasonable diligence prior to trial
  3. 3 Whether the fresh evidence was material enough to likely change the result

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal should be allowed because the fresh evidence, even if accepted, could have been obtained at the time of trial with reasonable diligence, and it went only to credibility on the date rather than defeating the substance of the plaintiff's case. It was not such as to make a different result likely enough to justify setting aside the verdict. Costs could be ordered by a differently constituted court if expressly reserved.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Orders of Full Court set aside; judgment for plaintiff restored.

Orders

  • Order of the Full Court set aside
  • Verdict and judgment of jury in favour of plaintiff reinstated