Byrne v Boadle
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 25 November 1863 |
| Date | 25 November 1863 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 159 E.R. 299
IN THE COURT OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C 33 L. J. Ex. 13; 12 W. R 279, 9 L. T. 450 Followed, Briggs v Oliver, 1866, 4 H. & C. 407. Adopted, Smith v. Great Eastern Railway, 1866, L. R. 2 C. P. 11.
byrne v boadle. Nov. 25, 1863. - The plaintiff was walking in a public street past the defendant's shop when a barrel of flour fell upon him from a window above the shop, and seriously injured him. Held sufficient piima facie evidence of negligence for the juiy, to cast 011 the defendant the onus of proving that the accident was not caused by his negligence. [S. C 33 L. J. Ex. 13 ; 12 W. R 279 , 9 L. T. 450 Followed, Bnggs v Olivet, 1866, 4 H. & C. 407. Adopted, Smith v. Cheat Eastern Railway, 1866, L. R. 2 C. P. 11.] Declaration. For that the defendant, by his servants, so negligently and unskilfully managed and lowered certain barrels of flour by means of a certain jigger-hoist and maehinery attached to the shop of the defendant, situated in a, certain highway, along which the plaintiff was then passing, that by and through the negligence of the defendant, by his said servants, one of the said barrels of flour fell upon and struck against the plaintiff, whereby the plaintiff was thrown down, wounded, lamed, arid permanently injured, and was prevented from attending to his business foi a long time, to wit, thence'hitherto, and incurred great expense for medical attendance, and suffered great pain and anguish, and was otherwise damnified. Plea. Not guilty At the trial before the learned Assessor of the Court of Passage at Liverpool, the evidence adduced on the part of the plaintiff was as follows . - A witness named Critehley said : "On the 18th July, I was in Scotland Road, on the right side going aorth, defendant's shop is on that side. When I was opposite to his shop, a bairel of flour fell from a window above in defendant's house and shop, and knocked [723] the plaintiff down. He was carried into an adjoining shop. A horse and cart came opposite the defendant's door. Barrels of flour were in the cart. I do not think the barrel was being lowered by a rope. I cannot say : I did not see the barrel until it struck the plaintiff. It was not swinging when it struck the plaintiff It struck him on the shoulder and knocked him towards the shop. No one called out until after the accident." The plaintiff said : " ob approaching Scotland Place and defendant's shop, I lost all recollection I felt no blow. I saw nothing to warn me of danger. I was taken home in a cab. I was helpless for a fortnight." (He then clesciibed his sufferings.) " I saw the path clear. I did not see any cart opposite defendant's shop " Another witness said. "I saw a barrel falling I don't know how, but fiom defendant's " The only other witness was a surgeon, who described the injury which the plaintiff had received. It was admitted that the defendant was a dealer in flour. It was submitted, on the part of the defendant, that theie was no evidence of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Walsh v Holst & Company Ltd
...the brick fell, and the Appellant contends that "Res ipsa loquitur", for the brick speaks just as the barrel of flour in ( Byrne v. Boadle 2 H. & C. 722). In his judgment Chief Baron Pollock used the following language: "So in the building or repairing a house, or putting pots on the chimne......
- Government of the Federated Malay States, The; Ong Ee Lim
- Gayler and Pope Ltd v Davies & Son
- Ratcliffe v Plymouth and Torbay Health Authority and another
-
No Trout in the Milk
...That won’t happen unless somebody was negligent. The Ridgeway court cites the seminal res ipsa loquitur case of Byrne v Boadle, (1863) 2 H & C. 722, 159 Eng. Rep. 299 (Ct. Exch), where a barrel of flour fell out of a warehouse window and clobbered some poor unfortunate. That barrel stays in......
-
The many facets of Cook v. Lewis.
...Trindade & Cane, supra note 32, at 262-74. (41) Fridman, supra note 32, at 342; Klar, supra note 32, at 41-2. (42) Byrne v. Boadle (1863), 159 E.R. 299. (43) [1972] 3 All E.R. 1008 (H.L.). In Fitzgerald v. Lane, [1987] 3 W.L.R. 249, at 262, Nourse L.J. wrote of McGhee: "a benevolent pri......
-
Main Structures of Product Liability in German Private and Criminal Law
...Graziano & Oertel “EC Tort Law” in Tort La w of the E uropean Com munity 45399 BGHZ 51, 91, 104 (“Hühnerpest”)100 Cf Byrne v Bo adle [1863] 2 H & C 722, 159 Eng Rep 299; Ng Chun Pui v Lee Chuen Tat [1988] RTR 298; Grant v Austra lian Knitting Mills Lt d [1936] AC 85 101; Reimann 2003 AmJCom......
-
Medical Negligence and the Nigerian National Health Insurance Scheme: Civil Liability, No-Fault or a Hybrid Model?
...159 E.R. 665, where the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur was first established). Notably, the maxim first appeared in Byrne v. Boadle (1863) 9 LT 450. See also Cassidy v. Ministry of Health [1951] 2 KB 343; Henderson v. Henry E. Jenkins & Sons [1970] AC 282; and Lloyde v. West Midlands Gas Boa......