Waddell v Norton and Another: Copeland v Norton and Another
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1966 |
| Date | 01 January 1966 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Northern Ireland) |
Action arising out of collision outside the jurisdiction between two vehicles - Evidence to suggest that defendant within the jurisdiction not to blame - Whether action properly brought - Whether non-disclosure of evidence amounted to attempt to deceive the court - R.S.C. O. 11, r. 1(h).
Two motor cars, driven respectively by a driver who was resident in Northern Ireland and a driver who was resident in and a citizen of the Republic of Ireland, were in collision in the Republic of Ireland. Both drivers were killed as were all the passengers save one who survived with injuries. Two actions were begun in Northern Ireland, one by the administratrix of a deceased passenger and one by the injured passenger. Each action was brought against the respective personal representatives of the two drivers, and in each case after the writ had been served on the personal representative of the Northern Ireland driver the plaintiff sought and obtained leave to serve a writ on the personal representative of the other driver in the Republic of Ireland. Application was made by the defendant out of the jurisdiction to have the orders for service out of the jurisdiction discharged on the ground that the actions were not "properly brought"against the defendant within the jurisdiction within the meaning of Order 11, Rule 1 (h). This submission was based on police evidence which tended to suggest that the Northern Ireland driver had...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McCarthy v Pillay
...forum and therefore Ireland was the forum conveniens. Citations: RSC O.11 r2 RSC O.11 r5 RSC O.11 r1(H) RSC O.11 WADDELL V NORTLAND & ANOR 1966 NI 85 WITTED V GALBRAITH 1893 1 QB 431 ANALOG DEVICES DV V ZURICH INSURANCE CO 2002 1 IR 272 SHORTT V IRELAND 1996 2 IR 188 RSC O.11 r11 TROMSO......