Shaw v Sloan and Others

JurisdictionNorthern Ireland
Judgment Date01 January 1982
Date01 January 1982
CourtCourt of Appeal (Northern Ireland)
(C.A.)
Shaw
and
Sloan and Others

Negligence -Actions founded on same acts - Second defendant not party to earlier proceedings but called as witness - Whether privity of interest between second and third defendants.

In June, 1978, a motor cycle owned and ridden by the first defendant collided with a car driven by the second defendant and owned by the third defendant. In January, 1979, the third defendant was successful in a county court action for damages against the first defendant for damage to his car. In an action by the plaintiff, who had been a pillion passenger on the motor cycle, the second and third defendants issued a third party notice claiming to be indemnified by the first defendant against the plaintiff's claim on the ground of the first defendant's negligence and that by reason of the decision in the county court the issue of liability for the accident was res judicata. The question whether the first defendant was estopped from disputing liability was tried as a preliminary point. Held that before estoppel of an issue can arise there must have been (i) a final determination of the same issue in previous proceedings by a court of competent jurisdiction and (ii) the parties bound by the earlier decision must have been either the same parties as are sought in the later proceedings to be estopped or their privies. In the present case, while on a close technical analysis of the legal issues the precisely formulated issues in the two actions would be different...

To continue reading

Request your trial
27 cases
  • PJSC National Bank Trust v Boris Mints
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court)
    • 11 April 2022
    ...though no issue estoppel has arisen. However, it is likely to be a rare case in which this is so. As Lord Lowry noted in Shaw v Sloan [1982] NI 393, 397: “The entire corpus of authority in issue estoppel is based on the theory that it is not an abuse of process to relitigate a point where a......
  • Reamsbottom v Raftery
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 1 January 1991
    ...formulate his defence or call his own evidence. Donohuev. BrowneIR [1986] I.R. 90 followed. Dicta of O'Donnell L.J. in Shaw v. SloanDNI [1982] N.I. 393, 410, and Megarry V.C. in Gleeson v. J. Wippel & Co.WLR [1977] 1 W.L.R. 510, 516 approved. Reamsbottom v. Raftery Hazel Reamsbottom Plainti......
  • Lawless v Bus Éireann
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 8 February 1994
    ...Citations: REAMSBOTTOM V RAFTERY 1991 1 IR 531 DONOHOE V BROWNE 1986 IR 90 BROWNELL V BUS EIREANN UNREP SMITH 18.12.90 SHAW V SLOAN 1982 NI 393 GLEESON V J WIPPELL & CO lTD 1977 1 WLR 510 Synopsis: ACTION Issues Estoppel - Vehicles - Collision - Damage - First action by passenger agains......
  • McGuinness v Motor Distributors Ltd
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 1 January 1997
    ...LTD JAMES McGUINNESS PLAINTIFF AND MOTOR DISTRIBUTORS LIMITED AND TONY KELLY CAR SALESLIMITED DEFENDANTS Citations: SHAW V SLOAN 1982 NI 393 LAWLESS V BUS EIREANN 1994 1 IR 474 REAMSBOTTOM V RAFFERTY 1991 1 IR 531 MCSHANE V MCGINN UNREP KEANE 18.5.95 Synopsis: CONTRACT Breach of contract......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT