Mitchell v. Samuel M'Harg & Son [1923] ScotLR 393 (20 March 1923)

Mitchell v. Samuel M'Harg & Son [1923] ScotLR 393 (20 March 1923)

The judge erred in withdrawing the case from the jury as the evidence on contributory negligence was not conclusive; such questions are primarily for the jury. The procedural challenge by motion for a new trial was competent in the circumstances, given the uncertain state of the law and practice.

Citation
[1923] ScotLR 393
Parties
Pursuer: Mrs Violet Gregor or Mitchell; Defenders: Samuel M'Harg & Son
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
20 March 1923
Procedural Posture
Civil Jury Trial (reparation/damages) / Appeal From Jury Verdict; Motion for New Trial
Outcome
Verdict set aside; new trial granted.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Jury Trial Procedure, Withdrawal of Case From Jury, Misdirection by Judge, New Trial, Bill of Exceptions
Tort Civil Procedure Negligence Contributory Negligence Jury Trial Procedure Withdrawal of Case From Jury Misdirection by Judge 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 Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Violet Gregor or Mitchell

Pursuer

Samuel M'Harg & Son

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Civil Jury Trial (reparation/damages) / Appeal From Jury Verdict; Motion for New Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it was competent for the pursuer to proceed by motion for a new trial rather than by bill of exceptions to challenge the judge's direction in law withdrawing the case from the jury.
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in withdrawing the case from the jury on the ground of contributory negligence.

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred in withdrawing the case from the jury as the evidence on contributory negligence was not conclusive; such questions are primarily for the jury. The procedural challenge by motion for a new trial was competent in the circumstances, given the uncertain state of the law and practice.

Court Disposition

Verdict set aside; new trial granted.

Orders

  • Verdict of jury set aside.
  • New trial granted.