Week 12: Relevancy of Judgment

Previous Judgments relevant to bar a second suit or trial:

The existence of any judgment, order or decree which by taw prevents any Court from taking cognisance of a suit or holding a trial, is a relevant fact when the question is whether such Court ought to take cognisance of such suit or to hold such trial.  

 

Relevancy of certain judgments in probate etc., jurisdiction:

A final judgment, order on decree of a competent Court in the exercise of probate matrimonial admiralty or insolvency jurisdiction, which confers upon or takes away from any person any legal character, or which declares any person to be entitled to any such character, or to be entitled to any specific thing, not as against any specified person but absolutely, is relevant when the existence of any such Legal character, or the title of any such person to any such thing, is relevant.  
Such judgment, order or decree is conclusive proof—   that any legal character which it confers accused, at the time when such judgment, order or decree came into operation ; that any legal character, to which it declares any such person to be entitled, accrued to that parson at the time when such Judgment, order or decree declares it to have accused to that person; that any legal character which It takes away from any such person ceased at the time from which such judgment, order or decree declared that it had ceased or should cease; and that anything to which it declares any person to be so entitled was the property of that person at the tune from which such judgment, order or decree declares that it had been or should be his property.  

 

Relevancy and effect of judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in Article 55: Judgments, orders, or decrees other than those mentioned m Article 55 are relevant if they relate to matters of, a public nature relevant to the enquiry ; but such judgments, orders or decrees are not conclusive proof of that which they state.  
Illustrations:

A sues B for trespass or his land, B alleges tile existence of a public right of way over the land, which A denies.  
The existence of a decree in favour of the defendant, in a suit by A against C for a trespass on the same land in which C alleged the existence of the same right of way, is relevant, but it Is not conclusive proof that the right of way exists.                         

 

Judgments, etc., other than those mentioned in Articles 54 to 56, when relevant:

Judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in Articles 54, 55 and 56 are irrelevant, unless the existence of such judgment order or decree is a fact in issue or is relevant under some other provision of this Order.  
Illustrations:

(a) A and B separately sue C for a libel which reflects upon each of them, C in each case says that the matter alleged to be libellous is true, and the circumstances are such that it Is probably true In each case, or in neither.  
A obtains a decree against C for damages oh the ground that C failed to make out his justification, the Tact is irrelevant as between B and C.  
(b) A prosecutes B for adultery with C, A's wife. B denies that C is A's wife but the Cowl convict B of adultery. Afterwards, C is prosecuted for bigamy in marrying B during A's lifetime. C says that she never was A's wife. The judgment against B is irrelevant as against C,  

(c) A prosecutes B for stealing a cow from him, B Is convicted A afterwards sues C for the cow which B had sold to him before his conviction. As between A and C. the judgment against B is irrelevant.  
(d) A has obtained a decree for the possession of land against B. C, B's son, murders A in consequence.  
The existence of the judgment is relevant, as showing motive for a crime.  
(e) A is charged with theft and with having been previously convicted of theft. The previous conviction is relevant as a fact in issue.  
(f) A is tried for the murder of B. The fact that B prosecuted A for libel and that A was convicted and sentenced, is relevant and under Article 21 as showing the motive for the fact in issue.  
 

Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetence of court may be proved:

Any party to a suit or other proceeding may show that any judgment, order or decree which is relevant under Articles 54, 55 or 56, and which has bean proved by the adverse party, was delivered by a Court not competent to deliver it, or was obtained by fraud or collusion.

Download Files

qso.pdf (0.16 MB )