Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE SMALLFIELD CASE

TO GO TO PRIVY COUNCIL

COURT OF APPEAL GRANTS LEAVE.

Leave was granted by th« Court of Appeal to-day to appeal to the Privy Council in the well-known Smallfleld case. The Court of Appeal had previously decided in favour of the appellant company, the National Mutual Life Association of Australasia, Ltd., against Luoy Smallfield, widow of the late Cecil Robert Smallfield, who was drowned in tile Waikato River at Hamilton on 26th January, 1921, and who had been insured for'the sum of £10,000 with the appellant company; After proceedings covering a p_eriod of several months, including inquiries by the Coroner, the case came before the Supreme Court, where it was heard before Mr. Justice Stringer and a special jury on 28th, 29th, and 3Oth November, 1921. Before the conclusion of the evidence the foreman of the jury announced that the jury was satisfied that the appellant company had failed to prove its contention that the deceased had died by his own hand.

Counsel for the appellant; then made an application to the Court for leave to amend the defence on the ground that the deceased had failed to furnish five answers to the questions submitted to him upon his proposal for insurance, and had failed to disclose matters affecting the risk. „.

By consent o*l,he parties the jury was discharged, and it was argued that the facts at issue should be. tried by the Judge alone. The Judge was of opinion that the new defence could not be established, and refused leave to amend, and directed judgment to be entered for the respondent, Lucy Smallfield. The insurance company th,en appealed to the higher Court, which recently delivered •a majority judgment reversing the decision of Mr. Justice Stringer. Against this judgment of the Court of Appeal application was made by Mr. P. B. Cooke to-day on behalf of Mrs. Lucy Smallfield, respondent in the case, for leave to appeal to the Privy Council. The application was not opposed, and their Honours granted leave under the usual terms to appeal to the Privy Council.. Mr. C. G. Whyte appeared for th© insurance company.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19220710.2.99

Bibliographic details

Evening Post, Volume CIV, Issue 8, 10 July 1922, Page 8

Word Count
353

THE SMALLFIELD CASE Evening Post, Volume CIV, Issue 8, 10 July 1922, Page 8

THE SMALLFIELD CASE Evening Post, Volume CIV, Issue 8, 10 July 1922, Page 8

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert