Gilmour v. Hansen [1920] ScotLR 518 (28 May 1920)

Gilmour v. Hansen [1920] ScotLR 518 (28 May 1920)

The admission of hearsay evidence regarding statements made at confinement was improper, as it was neither de recenti nor part of the res gestæ, and its exclusion could have affected the verdict. The rejection of evidence from the police inspector was also improper, as it was competent under section 3 of the Evidence (Scotland) Act 1852. Both grounds justified setting aside the verdict.

Citation
[1920] ScotLR 518
Parties
Pursuer: Alexander Gilmour; Defender: Mary Hansen
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
28 May 1920
Procedural Posture
Action for Damages for Slander / Bill of Exceptions and Motion for New Trial
Outcome
Bill of exceptions allowed; verdict set aside; new trial granted.
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Hearsay, Credibility, Slander, Court of Session (scotland) Act 1850, Evidence (scotland) Act 1852
Evidence Defamation Admissibility of Hearsay Credibility Slander Court of Session (scotland) Act 1850 Evidence (scotland) Act 1852

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexander Gilmour

Pursuer

Mary Hansen

Defender

Procedural Posture

Action for Damages for Slander / Bill of Exceptions and Motion for New Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether hearsay evidence of statements made at confinement regarding paternity is admissible
  2. 2 Whether exclusion of evidence could have led to a different verdict
  3. 3 Competency of evidence elicited from police inspector regarding witness statements

Ratio Decidendi

The admission of hearsay evidence regarding statements made at confinement was improper, as it was neither de recenti nor part of the res gestæ, and its exclusion could have affected the verdict. The rejection of evidence from the police inspector was also improper, as it was competent under section 3 of the Evidence (Scotland) Act 1852. Both grounds justified setting aside the verdict.

Court Disposition

Bill of exceptions allowed; verdict set aside; new trial granted.

Orders

  • Verdict set aside
  • New trial granted