McGowan v Lord Advocate
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 14 January 1972 |
| Date | 14 January 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 8. |
| Court | Court of Session (Inner House - First Division) |
FIRST DIVISION.
Lord Stott and jury.
Evidence—Sufficiency—Evidence of single witness—Action of damages for personal injuries—Jury trial—Verdict for pursuer on uncorroborated evidence of pursuer—Pursuer contradicted on material points by only other witness called—No adverse comment on witness's evidence by pursuer's counsel—Other witnesses available but not called—Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act, 1968 (cap. 70), sec. 9 (2).
The Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act, 1968, enacts by sec. 9 (which applies to actions of damages for personal injuries):—"(2) … any rule of law whereby in any proceedings evidence tending to establish any fact, unless it is corroborated by other evidence, is not to be taken as sufficient proof of that fact shall cease to have effect in relation to any action to which this section applies, and accordingly … in any such action the court shall be entitled, if they are satisfied that any fact has been established by evidence which has been given in that action, to find that fact proved by that evidence, notwithstanding that the evidence is not corroborated."
A workman brought an action of damages in respect of an injury which he sustained while helping to unload boxes of ammunition from a trailer. The boxes were stacked on a pallet, which was lifted from the trailer by an overhead crane and lowered on to a platform, on which the pursuer was standing. In evidence before a jury the pursuer, whose case of fault was that the system of slinging was unsafe, deponed that one of the slings by which the load was suspended from the crane slipped off one corner of the pallet, with the result that the pallet tilted and went out of its normal line of descent, and, while he was trying to straighten it, crushed his wrist against a railway wagon standing behind him. In cross he attributed the occurrence to the fact that, before the lift began, one of the slings was twisted near the top, and when the weight came on, the twist straightened itself, causing a jerk which made the pallet tilt and swing out of its normal line. The only other witness to the merits was one of the slingers, who deponed that the system of slinging, which had been in use for over a year, was a perfectly safe one, that on the occasion of the accident there had been no twist in the sling, and that the pallet did not tilt or swing. In addressing the jury counsel for the pursuer made no adverse comment on this witness's evidence. The other slinger and the craneman, who, as the pursuer admitted, were in a position to see what happened, were not called as witnesses. The defender led no evidence.
The jury having found for the pursuer, he contended, in opposing a motion for a new trial, that they were entitled so to find, by virtue of sec. 9 (2) of the 1968 Act, on the basis of his own evidence alone, and to disregard that of the slinger.
Held, applying M'Ghee v. Glasgow Coal Co.,1923 S.C. 293, that, as the material parts of the pursuer's evidence were not only not corroborated but contradicted by the only...
To continue reading
Request your trial