M'Cormick v. The North British Railway Co.

Subject_1 Reparation Subject_2 Negligence Subject_3 Culpa Subject_4 Onus probandi. Facts: Action of damages for injury caused by a collision between two of the defenders' trains. Direction that the pursuers were bound to prove to the satisfaction of the Jury that the collision was occasioned through the fault of the defenders. Circumstances in which, the Jury being of opinion that the pursuers had failed to discharge this onus probandi , verdict was given for the defenders.

These were two actions of damages at the instance of the pursuers against the defenders for injuries said to have been received by them in a collision on the North British Railway, near Sunny-side (Coatbridge) Station, on 28th December 1871. The statement of facts as to the cause of the collision was the same in both cases, and they were, at suggestion of the Lord President, tried together.

The admitted facts were, that a collision took place between the train in which the pursuers were passengers, and some waggons of a goods train proceeding in opposite direction on another line of rails. The passenger train was going from Glasgow to Airdrie, and the goods train from Airdrie Page: 653 ↓

The defenders denied that the collision arose from any of the causes alleged by the pursuers; that the waggons were examined previous to being placed in the train by the defenders' inspectors in the usual method adopted by railway companies, by tapping the wheels and making a close inspection of the springs, drawbars, and coupling chains; and that this method was found effectual and satisfactory in detecting defects in waggons.

In answer to the pursuers' statement, made at the opening of their case, that the buffers of the two waggons only touched one another to the extent of an inch and a half, the defenders explained that they touched to the extent of 6 inches in the event of one end of the police waggon being opposite the defenders' waggon, and 4¾ inches in the event of the other end being opposite.