SALON V. EVANS

SALON V. EVANS

The appeal fails because the directions complained of were not legal misdirections but expressions of opinion on the facts, and, moreover, if taken as directions in law, they were correct given the evidence accepted by the jury.

Parties
Plaintiff: Salom; Defendant: Evans; Other: Mr. Jenkym
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 August 1950
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Malicious Prosecution, Partnerships, New Trial
Torts Malicious Prosecution Partnerships New Trial

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Salom

Plaintiff

Evans

Defendant

Mr. Jenkym

Other

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in his directions to the jury regarding the relationship between the partnership and the plaintiff's business and the regularity of mixing finances.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant could honestly and reasonably believe the plaintiff had stolen partnership moneys.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal fails because the directions complained of were not legal misdirections but expressions of opinion on the facts, and, moreover, if taken as directions in law, they were correct given the evidence accepted by the jury.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.