CIVIL JURISDICTION.

Grey River Argus, Volume XXIII, Issue 3612, 23 March 1880, Page 2

CIVIL JURISDICTION.

(Before His Honor Mr Justice Williams.) Saturday, March 20. The Court opened at 10 a. m. THE AUSTRALIAN MUTUAL PROVIDENT ; SOCIETY, APPELLANTS, AND ELIZA JANE THOMPSON, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE j LATE ROBERT THOMPSON, RESPONDENT. i This was an appeal from the District Court, Greymouth. Mr Button for appjellants, Messrs Guinness and South for respondent. The deceased Robert Thompson niade 1 a proposal to the appellants to insure his life on May 29th, 1878, for L2OO, which was accepted, and the first half-yearly premium paid. The deceased signed the proposal, giving , answers to certain questions, among which were the following :— " State if any serious illness, and the nature of it ; when such illness occurred, and the name and address of the medical practitioner, if any, employed ; whether had. consulted any medical man during the last five years." To all these questions the ' deceased answered in the negative, and at the foot of the proposal signed the following declaration : — " I hereby declare that tlie above statements are true, and that this proposal and declaration shall be the basis for effecting the above-mentioned assurance." The jury in the Court below denied that the statements of the deceased were untrue:; and also that the questions were material to the issue. They found, in answer to questions by hif Honor Judge Weston, that the qnes- ' tions in the proposal formed the basis of the contract, also that the said Thompson had within five years consulted a medical man, and that he had been seriously ill. Notwithstanding this finding, they awarded damages to the respondents to the full amount of L2OO. Appellants' counsel moved in the District Court, before the jury were discharged, either that his Honor Judge Weston should scud back the jury to amend their inconsistent verdict, or else order judgment to be entered for; the appellants on the issues found by the jury. The Judge having' adopted neither of these courses, and having ordered judgment for the plaintiff, the appeal was lodged. After argument by counsel, the Court held that as the facts were clearly found by the jury, the mere fact that general damages had been given for the respondent did not entitle her to have judgment entered. An order was made allowing the appeal, and judgment entered for the appellants, respondent to pay costs of the appeal.