Jones v Great Western Railway Company
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1930 |
| Court | House of Lords |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
138 cases
-
Cheong Ghim Fah and Another v Murugian s/o Rangasamy
...The common law has also long embraced this principle as succinctly stated by Lord Buckmaster in Jones v Great Western Railway Co (1930) 47 TLR 39 at 41: It is a mistake to think that because an event is unseen its cause cannot be reasonably inferred. 36 The burden of proof is not, however, ......
-
Ermine Charles (Administratrix of the Estate of Glenford Caudray Charles deceased) Claimant v Esau Herbert Eworth Stevens Defendants [ECSC]
...her case by a preponderance of probabilities. She can do so by proving that the other party drove carelessly. 25 InJones V GW RY (1930) 47 T.L.R. 39 the House of Lords held that where a person has a right to cross a railway and was found crushed between the buffers of shunted trunks without......
-
Weatherford Canada Ltd. et al. v. Corlac Inc. et al., (2011) 422 N.R. 49 (FCA)
...from the evidence, and if it is a reasonable deduction it may have the validity of legal proof": Jones v. Great Western Railway Co . (1930), 47 T.L.R. 39, p. 45, 144 L.T. 194 (H.L.). [170] Here, the judge's analysis with respect to inducement is deficient. However, the analysis must be read......
-
Merck & Co. et al. v. Apotex Inc. et al., (2010) 381 F.T.R. 162 (FC)
...between reasonable inference and pure conjecture. Lord Macmillan put the distinction this way in Jones v. Great Western Railway Co. (1930), 47 T.L.R. 39 at 45, 144 L.T. 194 at 202 (H.L.): 'The dividing line between conjecture and inference is often a very difficult one to draw. A conjecture......
Request a trial to view additional results