Doe ex dem. Stewart against Denton
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1785 |
| Date | 01 January 1785 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 99 E.R. 944
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
Vaise against Delaval
944 VAISE V. DEL AVAL 1 T. R. 11. [11] vaise against dei.aval. 1785. Affidavit of a juror that the jury, having been divided, tossed up, and that the plaintiff had won, rejected. Upon a motion by Law for a rule to set aside a verdict, upon an affidavit of two jurors, who swore that the jury, being divided in their opinion, tossed up, and that the plaintiffs friends won, in which was cited, Hale v. Cove, 1 Stra. 642. Per Lord Mansfield, Cb.J. The Court cannot (a)1 receive such an affidavit from any of the jurymen themselves, in all of whom such conduct is a very high misdemeanor (i)1: but in every such case the Court must derive their knowledge from some...
To continue reading
Request your trial
17 cases
-
DPP v Mahon
...has been reached not by a consideration of the evidence but by a random tossing of a coin by two of their number; Vaise v Delaval (1785) 1 TR 11, see also Harvey v Hewitt (1840) 8 Dowl 598 where it alleged that the jurors had drawn lots to decide their verdict. An affidavit from the jury ba......
-
R v Mirza; R v Connor and Rollock
...of such a statement?". 41 As to the first question, the basic rule as recognised in Qureshi is long-established. Thus in Vaise v Delaval (1785) 1 TR11, where Lord Mansfield said that the court cannot receive an affidavit from a juror as to the nature of the juror's deliberations. In Ellis v......
-
NH(Appellant) v The Director of Public Prosecutions
...v The Queen [No 2] (1984) 153 CLR 521 at 530–532 per Gibbs CJ and Mason J; [1984] HCA 7. 96 (2015) 123 SASR 523 at 570 [158]. 97 (1785) 1 TR 11 [ 99 ER 98 (1785) 1 TR 11 at 11 [ 99 ER 944 at 944] (footnotes omitted). 99 Rosshirt, ‘Admissibility of Jurors' Affidavits to Impeach Jury Verdict’......
-
Rolleston v R; Roche v R
...see Mirza, above n 21, at [95] per Lord Hope; and Pan, above n 20, at [49]. Both Mirza and Pan refer to Vaise v Delaval (1785) 1 TR 11, 99 ER 944 24 In New Zealand, see Papadopoulos, above n 21, at 626 and Tuia v R [1994] 3 NZLR 533 (CA) at 555; in Australia, Smith, above n 21, at [30]–[31]......
Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles
-
Subject Index
...Ltd[2004] EWCA Civ 330, BAT .. 195–196United States of America v Philip MorrisInc. [2004] EWCA Civ 330 ........... 193Vaise v Delaval (1785) 1 TR 11 .........187Van Mechelen v The Netherlands(1998) 25 EHRR 647 ......................184Visser v The Netherlands [2002] CrimLR 495 ...................
-
The Criminal Jury in England and Scotland: The Confidentiality Principle and the Investigation of Impropriety
...Democracy’ in N. Vidmar (ed.), World JurySystems (OUP: Oxford, 2000) 125. 5 [1922] 2 KB 113. 6 Ibid. at 118. See also Vaise v Dalava (1785) 1 TR 11; R v Armstrong [1922] All ER 153 at 157, per LordHewart CJ; R v Thompson [1962] 1 All ER 65. For Scotland, see the case of Janet Nicol (1767) d......
-
The Complaining Juror: Attorney-General v Scotcher
...left open and came up for consideration in the recent case of Attorney-General v Scotcher.4 * Email: g.daly@uea.ac.uk. 1 Vaise v Delaval (1785) 1 TR 11.2 R v Mirza; R v Connor and Rollock [2004] UKHL 2, [2004] 2 WLR 201, noted by G. Daly (2004) 8 & P 186; R v Smith [2005] UKHL 12, [2005] 1 ......
-
Jury Secrecy: R v Mirza; R v Connor and Rollock
...the power of thecourt; it was the long-standing rule of the common law not s. 8 that restrictedthe court’s inquiry.115Vaise v Delaval (1785) 1 TR 11.6R v Miah [1997] 2 Cr App R 12.7Harvey v Hewitt (1840) 8 Dowl 598 (evidence taken from bailiff and persons in adjoining room).8R v Young (Step......