Cullen v Clarke

Judgment Date01 January 1964
Date01 January 1964
CourtSupreme Court

Whether to be treated as total - Efforts to obtain work - Nature of evidence - Whether hearsay evidence admissible - Workmen's Compensation Act, 1934, s. 24 (1).

Section 24 (1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1934 provides that if a workman, who has so far recovered from the injury as to be fit for employment of a certain kind, has failed to obtain employment and it appears to the Court either - (a) that, having regard to all the circumstances, it is probable that the workman would, but for the continuing effects of the injury, be able to obtain work in the same grade in the same class of employment as before the accident; or (b) that his failure to obtain employment is a consequence, whether wholly or mainly, of the injury, the Court shall order that the workman is incapacity shall be treated as total incapacity. A builder's labourer had been found partially incapacitated. He applied to the Circuit Court for a finding that his partial incapacity should be treated as total, under s. 24 (1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1934. He gave evidence of many abortive efforts to obtain work. It was held in the Circuit Court that C. was not entitled to quote what prospective employers had said to him if he were seeking to rely on the truth of those statements as showing the reasons why the prospective employers refused to give him employment The Circuit Judge held that, accordingly the applicant had failed to bring himself within s. 24 sub-s. 1 of the Workmen's...

To continue reading

Request your trial
30 cases
  • Nevin v Nevin
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 7 February 2019 have brought about the death. The rules against hearsay and non-expert opinion 81 As stated by Kingsmill Moore J. in Cullen v Clarke [1963] I.R. 368, the rule against hearsay is a general rule, subject to many exceptions, that evidence of words spoken by a person who is not produced as ......
  • Eastern Health Board v M.K.; Re M., S. and W
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 29 January 1999
    ...from the normal rules of evidence. In re K. (Infants)ELR [1965] A.C. 201; Scott v. ScottELR [1913] A.C. 417; Cullen v. ClarkeIR [1963] I.R. 368; R. v. BurkeDLTR (1912) 47 I.L.T.R. 111; Re: W (Minors)FLR [1990] 1 F.L.R. 203; Southern Health Board v. C.H.IR [1996] 1 I.R. 219 considered. 3. (P......
  • Ulster Bank Ireland Ltd v O'Brien
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 16 December 2015
    ...reliability as a ground for admission was not argued on that appeal, however. The hearsay rule, it must be noted, has limitations. In Cullen v Clarke [1963] IR 368, at page 378, Kingsmill Moore J indicated: In view of some of the arguments addressed to the Court, it is necessary to emphasi......
  • DPP v Morgan
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 9 March 2015
    ...establish that the statement was made, it was not hearsay. 65 The position in that regard was succinctly stated by Kingsmill Moore J. in Cullen v. Clarke [1963] I.R.368 at p.378:- ‘[I]t is necessary to emphasise that there is no general rule of evidence to the effect that a witness may not ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT