In the interest of society as a whole, litigation must come to an end, and ‘When a litigant has obtained judgment in a Court of justice . . he is by law entitled not to be deprived of that judgment without very solid grounds’.
Lord Loreburn LC said, in relation to the exercise of a power to admit further evidence if it was thought ‘just’, that the evidence ‘must at least be such as is presumably to be believed, and if believed would be conclusive’. He considered an application for a new trial on the ground of res noviter, and said: ‘My Lords, the chief effect of the argument which your Lordships have heard is to confirm in my mind the extreme value of the old doctrine ‘Interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium’, remembering as we should that people who have means at their command are easily able to exhaust the resources of a poor antagonist’.
Farwell LJ said that, on appeal there should not be permitted to be used affidavits which ‘merely show at the outside that there will be oath against oath’.
Judges:
Loreburn LC, Farwell LJ
Citations:
[1910] AC 373, [1909] 2 KB 573
Cited by:
Cited – Ladd v Marshall CA 29-Nov-1954
Conditions for new evidence on appeal
At the trial, the wife of the appellant’s opponent said she had forgotten certain events. After the trial she began divorce proceedings, and informed the appellant that she now remembered. He sought either to appeal admitting fresh evidence, or for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.182557