M'Kinney v The Irish North-Western Railway Company

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 13 June 1868
• Date: 13 June 1868
• Court: Court of Exchequer Chamber (Ireland)

Exch. Cham.

Before MONAHAN, C. J., PIGOT, C. B. KEOGH, Oƒ€™HAGAN, and MORRIS, JJ., and FITZGERALD and DEASY, BB.

M'KINNEY

and

THE IRISH NORTH-WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY

Paterson v. WallaceUNK1 Macq. 748.

Brydon v. StewartUNK2 Macq. 30.

Bartonshill Coal Co. v. ReidUNK3 Macq. 266.

Weems v. MathiesonUNK4 Macq. 215.

Mersey Docks v. Gibbs; Mersey Docks v. PenhallowsELR11 H. L. 686; L. R. 1 H. L. 93.

Vaughan v. Cork and Youghal Railway Co.UNK12 Ir. C. L. R. 297.

Ashworth v. StanwnENRUNK3 E. & E. 701; 30 L. J. Q. B. 183.

Mellors v. ShawUNK1B. & S. 437; 30 L. J. Q. B. 333.

Holmes v. ClarkeENRENRUNKUNK6 H. & N. 349; 7 H. & N. 937; 30 L. J. Ex. 135; 31 L. J. Ex. 356.

Roberts v. SmithENRUNK2 H. & N. 213; 26 L. J. Ex. 319.

Priestley v. FowlerENRUNK3 M. & W. 19; 7 L. J. Ex. 42.

Potts v. PlunkettUNK9 Ir. C. L. R. 290.

Waller v. South-Eastern RailwayENR2 H. & C. 102.

Sullivan v. WatersUNK14 Ir. C. L. R. 460.

Williams v. CloughENRUNK3 H. & N. 258; 27 L. J. Ex. 325.

Griffiths v. GidlowENRUNK3 H. & N. 648; 27 L. J. Ex. 404.

Hutchinson v. York, Newcastle, and Berwick Railway CompanyENRUNK5 Ex. 343; 19 L. J. Ex. 296.

Waller v. South-Eastern Railway CompanyENR2 H. & C. 102.

Lovegrove v. London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway Company, Gallagher v. Exch. PiperENRUNK16 C. B. N. S. 669; 33 L. J. C. P. 320.

Riley v. BaxendaleENRUNK6 H. & N. 445; 30 L. J. Ex. 87.

Ruckley v. KiernanUNK7 Ir. C. L. R. 75.

Pleading — Negligence — Master and Servant.

600 THE IRISH REPORTS. Exch. Chant. 1868. May 27. June 13. INCENNEY v. THE IRISH NORTH-WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY (1). Pleading-Negligence-Master and Servant. A writ of Summons and Plaint stated in substance that the Defendants were owners of a railway, and that the husband of the Plaintiff was employed as a guard upon the railway, that it was the duty of the Defendants to keep the railway and the engines and carriages thereon in proper and sufficient order and repair, for the safe conveyance of the Plaintiff's husband, as such guard; but the Defendants, not regarding their duty in that behalf, did not keep the said railway, and suffered the said engines and carriages to get out of proper and sufficient order and repair, whereby, and by reason of the negligence of the Defendants in that behalf, a certain van or carriage of the train, in which the Plaintiff's husband was travelling as such guard, ran off such railway, and the Plaintiffs husband thereby received injuries, from the effect of which he died. Held (dissentiente FITZGERALD, B.), reversing the judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench, that the Plaint disclosed a good cause of action. ERROR on a judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench; allowing a demurrer to the Summons and Plaint. The Summons and Plaint stated that the Plaintiff was the -widow of John Mainney, who died on the 18th of August, 1865, from the injuries thereinafter mentioned ; and that there was no executor or administrator of the said John Mainney ; that the Defendants were owners of a certain railway for the conveyance of goods and passengers, and that the said John Mainney, the husband of the Plaintiff, was employed as a guard upon the said railway : averment, that it was the duty of the Defendants to keep the said railway, and the engines and carriages thereon, in proper and sufficient order and repair for the safe conveyance of the said. John M`Kinney as such guard ; but the Defendants, not regarding their duty in that behalf, did not keep the said railway and the said engines and. carriages in such proper and sufficient order and repair, but permitted the said railway, and the said engines and COMMON LAW SERIES. 601 carriages, to get out of proper and sufficient order and repair, Exch. Chum. whereby, and by reason of the negligence of the said Defendants 1868. KINNEY in the said behalf, a certain van or carriage of the train, in which 11' the said John M'Kinney was travelling as such guard, ran off the T -RIM NTH. said railway, and the said John McKinney received injuries from WESTERN HALLWAY Co. the effect of which he afterwards, and within twelve calendar months before the suit, died. To this Summons and Plaint the Defendants demurred. On the 12th May, 1866, the Court of Queen's Bench (dissentience O'Brien, J.) allowed the demurrer. (See the report, 11 Ir. Jur. N. S. 228,) The Plaintiff now brought error. J. P. Hamilton, Q. C., and. Hugh...