Strachan v. Caledonian Railway Co. [1910] ScotLR 456 (09 March 1910)

Strachan v. Caledonian Railway Co. [1910] ScotLR 456 (09 March 1910)

The jury's verdict in favour of the pursuer was set aside because the evidence, including the pursuer's own admissions, established clear and gross contributory negligence. The pursuers were trespassing and acted with manifest disregard for their own safety, and no reasonable jury could have found otherwise. Therefore, a new trial was ordered.

Citation
[1910] ScotLR 456
Parties
Pursuer: Nathan Strachan; Defender: Caledonian Railway Company
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
09 March 1910
Procedural Posture
Civil Action for Damages (personal Injury) / Motion for New Trial After Second Jury Verdict
Outcome
verdicts set aside; new trials granted
Legal Topics
Contributory Negligence, Jury Trial, Withdrawal of Case From Jury, Motion for New Trial
Tort Law Personal Injury Contributory Negligence Jury Trial Withdrawal of Case From Jury Motion for New Trial

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nathan Strachan

Pursuer

Caledonian Railway Company

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Action for Damages (personal Injury) / Motion for New Trial After Second Jury Verdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the jury's verdict in favour of the pursuer was contrary to the evidence due to contributory negligence
  2. 2 Whether the case should have been withdrawn from the jury
  3. 3 Whether a third trial should be granted after two jury verdicts for the pursuer

Ratio Decidendi

The jury's verdict in favour of the pursuer was set aside because the evidence, including the pursuer's own admissions, established clear and gross contributory negligence. The pursuers were trespassing and acted with manifest disregard for their own safety, and no reasonable jury could have found otherwise. Therefore, a new trial was ordered.

Court Disposition

verdicts set aside; new trials granted

Orders

  • The verdicts for the pursuers are set aside.
  • A third trial is ordered.