his cause of action or defence will hold water or not, and anything
which is not obviously frivolous or vexatious will do by way of
pleading for the purpose of the trial and for getting the opposite
party into the box.
Another change was made by the rules of 1883, which was regarded by
some common law lawyers as revolutionary. Formerly every issue of fact
in a common law action, including the amount of damage, had to be
decided by the verdict of a jury. "The effect of the rules of 1883,"
said Lord Lindley, who was a member of the rule committee, "was to
make trial without a jury the normal mode of trial, except where trial
with a jury is ordered under rules 6 or 7a, or may be had without an
order under rule 2" (_Timson_ v. _Wilson_, 38 Ch. D. 72, at p. 76).
The effect of the rules may be thus summarized: (1) In the chancery
division no trial by jury unless ordered by the judge. (2) Generally
the judge may order trial without a jury of any cause or issue, which
before the Judicature Act might have been so tried without consent of
parties, or which involves prolonged investigation of documents or
accounts, or scientific or local investigation. (3) Either party has a
right to a jury in actions of slander, libel, false imprisonment,
malicious prosecution, seduction or breach of promise of marriage,
upon notice without order; (4) or in any other action, by order. (5)
Subject as above, actions are to be tried without a jury unless the
judge, of his own motion, otherwise orders.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account