Merritt v. Hepenstal

Merritt v. Hepenstal

The servant had resumed the master's business when he set out to complete the remaining delivery and therefore the master was vicariously liable for the servant's negligence; contributory negligence did not bar recovery by the infant; any improperly admitted nurse opinion could be disregarded by the appellate court in a bench trial and the verdict upheld on the remaining evidence.

Citation
(1895) 25 SCR 150
Parties
Appellant (defendant): William H. Merritt; Respondent (plaintiff): Reginald F. D. Hepenstal
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
31 October 1895
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (tort Negligence / Master and Servant) / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada; Judgment Delivered
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Master and Servant, Deviation and Resumption of Employment, Employer Vicarious Liability, Contributory Negligence of Infants, Admissibility of Witness Opinion Evidence, Appellate Review of Bench Trial Findings, Damages Assessment
Source Language
English
Labour Law Tort Negligence Vicarious Liability Contributory Negligence Evidence Master and Servant Deviation and Resumption of Employment +5 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 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William H. Merritt

Appellant (defendant)

Reginald F. D. Hepenstal

Respondent (plaintiff)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (tort Negligence / Master and Servant) / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada; Judgment Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the servant had resumed the master's business at the time of the accident and thus whether the master was vicariously liable
  2. 2 Whether the infant plaintiff's conduct constituted contributory negligence barring recovery
  3. 3 Whether the nurse's opinion evidence was admissible and if its admission required a new trial

Ratio Decidendi

The servant had resumed the master's business when he set out to complete the remaining delivery and therefore the master was vicariously liable for the servant's negligence; contributory negligence did not bar recovery by the infant; any improperly admitted nurse opinion could be disregarded by the appellate court in a bench trial and the verdict upheld on the remaining evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Verdict for plaintiff in the Supreme Court of New Brunswick (respondent) upheld.