Graigola Merthyr Co Ltd v Swansea Corporation: 1926

In cases involving expert evidence only two experts are to be heard on each side, unless the judge is satisfied that by reason of special circumstances justice cannot be done without hearing further expert evidence. This rule does not exclude either side from calling anyone to speak to matters he has seen, even though an expert, but in such cases the examination must be confined to matters of fact, and such person must not be treated as an expert witness.
‘Preventing justice excelleth punishing justice’


Tomlin J


(1926) 71 Sol Jo 142


England and Wales

Cited by:

First ProceedingsGraigola Merthyr Co Ltd v Swansea Corporation (No 2) 1928
The plaintiffs owned two collieries, worked as one. The defendant owned an adjacent reservoir, constructed in pursuance of a special Act, incorporating sections from the Waterworks Clauses Act 1847. Wanting to take their seams under the reservoir, . .
Earlier proceedingsGraigola Merthyr Co Ltd v Swansea Corporation CA 1928
The plaintiff mine-owner having had a contract that the neighbouring land owner would not refill its reservoir which would result in its workings being flooded, and that contract having expired, now sought an injunction to prevent the reservoir from . .
Earlier ProceedingsGraigola Merthyr Co Ltd v Swansea Corporation HL 1929
The Act of 1893 provided that a successful defendant should be entitled to costs as between solicitor and client in an action in respect of ‘any act done in the pursuance, or execution, or intended execution of any Act of Parliament or of any public . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Evidence

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619994