Scottish Court of Session Decisions

This was a case of a special nature. In the action between Thomas Thorburn, W.S. residing in Dumfries, and Kenneth M. Thorburn, W.S. issues were sent to a jury. Only documentary evidence was laid before the jury by the pursuer. The defender adduced no evidence. The jury found a verdict for the pursuer, contrary to the opinion of the presiding Judge. The defender, on stating that the verdict was against the opinion of the presiding Judge, obtained a rule against the pursuer to show cause why a new trial should not be granted. In support of the rule he insisted chiefly that parole evidence of an important nature was within the pursuer's power, and ought to have been adduced by him. The pursuer answered that the documentary evidence, as it stood, was consistent with the verdict, and supported it; and that it was equally competent to the defender to have called all the parole evidence had he chosen to do so. The Court intimated, that, without meaning to indicate any approval of the verdict, and, although it rather appeared that the evidence was of a meagre description, yet there was nothing in the case to warrant them to set the verdict aside, as contrary to evidence. Their Lordships accordingly discharged the rule.