Carey v. Carey's Trustees and Others [1912] ScotLR 982 (19 July 1912)

Carey v. Carey's Trustees and Others [1912] ScotLR 982 (19 July 1912)

The unavailability of material witnesses, without more, does not constitute sufficient grounds for postponement of a jury trial, especially where the party seeking postponement had knowledge of the trial schedule and failed to act with due diligence.

Citation
[1912] ScotLR 982
Parties
Pursuer: William Carey; Defenders: Trustees of the late Frederick Charles Carey and others
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
19 July 1912
Procedural Posture
Civil / Motion for Postponement of Jury Trial
Outcome
motion for postponement refused
Legal Topics
Jury Trial, Postponement of Trial, Material Witness, Act of Sederunt
Civil Procedure Jury Trial Postponement of Trial Material Witness Act of Sederunt

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Carey

Pursuer

Trustees of the late Frederick Charles Carey and others

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Civil / Motion for Postponement of Jury Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the unavailability of material witnesses (one abroad, one with unknown address) constitutes sufficient grounds for postponement of a jury trial

Ratio Decidendi

The unavailability of material witnesses, without more, does not constitute sufficient grounds for postponement of a jury trial, especially where the party seeking postponement had knowledge of the trial schedule and failed to act with due diligence.

Court Disposition

motion for postponement refused

Orders

  • trial to proceed as scheduled