Gladstone Fraser Appellant v Clifton Cupid Respondent [ECSC]

JurisdictionCaribbean States
CourtEastern Caribbean Supreme Court
JudgeP. CECIL LEWIS, J.A., Acting Chief Justice
Judgment Date26 May 1970
Neutral Citation[1970] ECSC J0526-4
Docket NumberMagistrate's Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1970
[1970] ECSC J0526-4

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

Before:

The Honourable the Acting Chief Justice

The Honourable Mr. Justice P. Cecil Lewis

The Honourable Mr. Justice St. Bernard (Ag.)

Magistrate's Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1970

Between:
Gladstone Fraser
Appellant
and
Clifton Cupid
Respondent

E.F. Adams for Appellant

O.R. Sylvester for Respondent

P. CECIL LEWIS, J.A.
1

The plaintiff/respondent brought an action against the defendant/appellant for the sum of $64.33 for damage committed to the plaintiff's house at Sion Hill on the 15th day of September, 1969. He alleged in a statement of claim that the defendant threw stones on the plaintiff's dwelling house, broke the windows and damaged the partition thereby causing the plaintiff to suffer loss and he claimed for -

(a)

cost of materials -

$ ¢

11 panes glass, putty, nails and paint

27.33

1 sheet hardboard

5.00

(b)

workmanship

12.00

(c)

damages

20.00

a total claim for

$64.33

2

The trial judge awarded the plaintiff/respondent $25.00 special damages, $10.00 general damages and $12.72 costs. Against this order the appellant has appealed, on the sole ground "that the decision is altogether unwarranted by the evidence in like manner as if the ease had been tried by a jury there would not have been sufficient evidence to sustain a verdict."

3

The facts of the case are that the plaintiff/respondent who lives at Sion Hill, and the defendant/appellant were in court on the 15th of September, 1969. Apparently there was bad blood between them. After the case was over the plaintiff/respondent went home, and when he got there he found that the glass windows of his house were broken and a partition made of hardboard had holes in it. All the glass panes of the windows were damaged, the exact number was twelve. He got an estimate of the cost of replacing the glass panes and repairing the damage, and that estimate amounted to $53.40. He made it quite clear that when he left home that morning to go to court his house was undamaged.

4

It is quite clear then from the plaintiff/respondent's evidence that he did not see the defendant/appellant damage his house, but a witness, Ferdinand Ballantyne, said on that day when he was passing Sion Hill about 11.15 a.m. he saw the defendant stoning a house at Sion Hill. He saw him pelt two stones then he went back under his own house and took up two more stones and again pelted them at the house. He did not know at the...

To continue reading

Request your trial