Alexander v. Vye

Alexander v. Vye

The majority held the appeal must be dismissed: testimony of a witness who received, published and destroyed a manuscript may be admissible to identify the manuscript as written by the defendant even if the witness only acquired knowledge of the defendant's handwriting subsequently by correspondence, and the matter was properly for the jury to weigh; objections to admissibility did not establish reversible error on the record and the verdict was maintained (appeal dismissed with costs).

Citation
(1889) 16 SCR 501
Parties
Appellant (defendant): Alexander E. Alexander; Respondent (plaintiff): George A. Vye
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 April 1889
Procedural Posture
Libel (defamation) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Supreme Court of New Brunswick After Jury Verdict and Denial of Non Suit or New Trial
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; application for leave to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council was refused.
Legal Topics
Proof of Handwriting, Lost or Destroyed Documents, Secondary Evidence, Cross Examination Limits, Change of Signature, Admissibility of Documentary Evidence
Source Language
English
Evidence Defamation Civil Procedure Proof of Handwriting Lost or Destroyed Documents Secondary Evidence Cross Examination Limits Change of Signature +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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexander E. Alexander

Appellant (defendant)

George A. Vye

Respondent (plaintiff)

Procedural Posture

Libel (defamation) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Supreme Court of New Brunswick After Jury Verdict and Denial of Non Suit or New Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a destroyed manuscript may be proved to have been written by a particular individual by testimony of a witness who had possessed and destroyed it but only acquired knowledge of the alleged author's handwriting after destruction
  2. 2 Whether documentary signatures and registers could be admitted after the defendant denied, on cross-examination, that he had changed his signature and whether the opposing party could then introduce documents to prove a change
  3. 3 Whether the admission of the contested evidence required a non-suit or new trial

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held the appeal must be dismissed: testimony of a witness who received, published and destroyed a manuscript may be admissible to identify the manuscript as written by the defendant even if the witness only acquired knowledge of the defendant's handwriting subsequently by correspondence, and the matter was properly for the jury to weigh; objections to admissibility did not establish reversible error on the record and the verdict was maintained (appeal dismissed with costs).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; application for leave to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council was refused.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs