 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom House of Lords Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom House of Lords Decisions >> Matson v. Baird & Co [1878] UKHL 778 (5 July 1878) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1878/15SLR0778.html Cite as: [1878] UKHL 778, 15 ScotLR 778 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Page: 778↓
[Before the
[Ante, p. 73, Nov. 9, 1877, 5 Rettie 87].
Subject_Reparation — Private Railway — Erection of Gates and Fences — Statutes 2 and 3 Vict. cap. 45; 5 and 6 Vict. cap. 55, sec. 9; and Railways Clauses Consolidation (Scotland) Act 1845 (8 and 9 Vict. cap. 33), sec. 99.
A horse having strayed from the public road by a level-crossing, which was without gate or fence, upon a branch line of railway
Page: 779↓
belonging to the proprietors of the ground, and from that at a distance of about half-a-mile having got upon the main line of the North British Railway Company, which was likewise without gate or fence, and been killed—in an action of damages the proprietors of the branch line were [ aff. judgment of Court of Session] assoilzied, there being no obligation under the Railway Statutes to erect gates and fences on private lines.
A horse belonging to the appellant [Matson] escaped from a field by night, through no fault of the owner, and strayed along an adjoining turnpike road, from which it got upon a private branch railway, the property of Baird & Co., the respondents, at a level-crossing where there were no gates either across the railway or the road, and no one in charge. It then proceeded down the branch railway till it reached the North British main line, where it was killed by a passing train. Matson brought an action of damages in the Sheriff Court of Lanarkshire against Baird & Co. and the North British Railway (the latter of whom were not parties to the present appeal), contending that Baird & Company were under a statutory obligation to have gates at level-crossings of their railway over the public road, and that if this were not so, they failed in their duty at common law in leaving open to the public road both their own line and the main line of the North British. The First Division of the Court of Session— rev. the Sheriff of Lanarkshire ( Clark)—assoilzied the defenders (Nov. 9, 1877, ante, p. 73, 5 Rettie 87).
Matson appealed to the House of Lords.
The respondents were not called on.
At delivering judgment—
Interlocutor of Court of Session affirmed, and appeal dismissed with costs.
Counsel for Appellant— Herschell, Q.C.— Collyer. Agent— Andrew Beveridge, solicitor.
Counsel for Respondent— Lord Advocate (Watson)— M'Clymont. Agents— Morton & Cutter, solicitors.