Coleman v The Cork and Youghal Railway Company

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 21 January 1861
• Date: 21 January 1861
• Court: Queen's Bench Division (Ireland)

Queen's Bench

COLEMAN

and

THE CORK AND YOUGHAL RAILWAY COMPANY.

Lambert v. Hutchinson 2 M. & Gr. 858.

Andrews v. Eaton 21 Law Jour., N. S., Exch., 110.

Parbery v. Newnham 7 Mee. & W. 378.

Leslie v. RichardsonENR 6 C. B. 378.

In re Aitken 3 Jur., N. S., 1296.

Hodgkinson v. FernieENR 3 C. B., N. S., 189.

Hutchinson v. Shepperton 13 Q. B. 955.

Morris's ArbitrationENR 6 El. & Bl. 383.

Hodgkinson v. FernieENR 3 C. B., N. S., 189.

Browne v. Collyer 20 Law Jour., N. S., Q. B., 426.

Fuller v. FenwickENR 3 C. B. 705.

Hellaby v. Brown 1 Exch. Rep., N. S., 729.

Morris v. MorrisENR 6 El. & Bl. 383.

368 COMMON LAW REPORTS. H., T. 1861. Queen's Bench COLEMAN v. THE CORK AND YOUGHAL RAILWAY 'COMPANY. Jan. 21, The Common THE plaintiff, as administratrix of her deceased husband, sued the Law Proce dure Amend- Cork and Youghal Rail-way Company for compensation for the death ment Act (Ireland) 1856 of her husband, who, while in the employ of the Company, had been s. 11, gives the Court jmisdic- killed by an accident on the works of the railway. tion to remit, The action was to have been tried in Dublin before the Lord at any time, an award to the arbitrator, in order that he the case was called on, the attorneys on both sides entered into a may correct a superficial er- consent, which was afterwards made a rule of Court. It was (inter ror. This juris- alia) consented, "that the several issues which contain the subject- diction cannot be ousted by " matter of this action, as to the matters of fact, be referred to the inserting a prohibitory " award, order and final determination of Cornelius Keller, of the clause in the " city of Cork, Alderman, and who is to assess damages for the consent. Semble- "plaintiff (if any), subject to the questions of law ; and, as to all That the Court will, in every "matters of law, in reference to said action, and the liability of the case, limit a time within " Company therein, to the award, order and final determination of which the amendment " Thomas Forsythe, of the city of Cork, one of her Majesty's Conn must be made. " sel, so as the said arbitrators do make and publish their award in " writing, and signed by them, . . . . on or before the 20th day " of December 1860, or on or before any other day to which the said " arbitrators by any writing signed by them, from time to time, and " not later than the 10th day of January 1861, enlarge the time for "making their award." The issues referred were then enumerated ; and it was further consented that " the said Cornelius Keller do assess contingent damages on the demurrer" taken by the plaintiff to the fourth defence ; and " that the costs of this action, and of preÂ" paring and executing said consent, and of making same a rule of " Court, and the costs of the reference and award, including the fee "or fees to be paid to said arbitrator, Thomas Forsythe, do abide the COMMON LAW REPORTS. 369 "award of said arbitrators or arbitrator, -as the case may be, and T. 1861. ueen's B enc h " that all the witnesses on the reference shall be examined by the Q COLEMAN " arbitrators on oath." v. The award, which bore date the 19th of December 1860, recited CORK AND YOUGHAL the consent, the order of the Court, the examination of witnesses on RAILWAY. oath by the arbitrators, and proceeded thus-"/, the said Cornelius "Keller, do make the following award of and concerning the matters "so referred to me alone as aforesaid. I award, &c. ; and I assess " the plaintiff's damages at the sum of 1150; and do award that "the defendants shall pay the sum of £150 to the plaintiff. And I...