Montreal Locomotive Works, Ltd. v. McDonnaugh

The appeal was allowed and a new trial ordered because the jury's findings were obscure and inconsistent and demonstrably left substantial doubt as to causation and the meaning of their answers; therefore the verdict could not stand.

Citation: (1920) 61 SCR 232
Parties: Defendant/appellant: Montreal Locomotive Works, Ltd.; Plaintiff/respondent: George McDonnaugh
Court: Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 17 December 1920
Procedural Posture: Torts Negligence / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec
Outcome: Appeal allowed; judgment of the Court of King's Bench reversed; new trial ordered.
Legal Topics: Contributory Negligence, Causation, Jury Findings Inconsistency, New Trial, Judicial Directions to Jury
Source Language: English

Torts Negligence Damages Civil Procedure Contributory Negligence Causation Jury Findings Inconsistency New Trial +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Montreal Locomotive Works, Ltd.

Defendant/appellant

George McDonnaugh

Plaintiff/respondent

Procedural Posture

Torts Negligence / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec

Legal Issues

1 Whether there was a causal relation between the defective machine and the plaintiff's injuries
2 Whether the jury's findings were clear and consistent such that the verdict could stand
3 Whether the plaintiff acted contrary to instructions and whether his conduct was the proximate cause of the injury

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of the Court of King's Bench reversed; new trial ordered.

Orders

Appeal allowed with costs
Judgment of the Court of King's Bench reversed