Stella Browne Appellant v Solita Forbes Respondent [ECSC]

CourtEastern Caribbean Supreme Court
Docket NumberCivil Appeal No 3 of 1970(Magisterial)
JudgeGORDON C.J.(Ag.), CECIL LEWIS, J.A., ST. BERNARD, J.A., P. Cecil Lewis
Judgment Date26 May 1970
JurisdictionCaribbean States
Neutral Citation[1970] ECSC J0526-2
[1970] ECSC J0526-2

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

Before:

The Hon. the Chief Justice (Ag.)

The Hon. Mr. Justice P. Cecil Lewis

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

Civil Appeal No 3 of 1970(Magisterial)

Between:
Stella Browne
Appellant
and
Solita Forbes
Respondent

E.F. Adams for Appellant

Daniel Williams for Respondent

GORDON C.J.(Ag.)
1

This is a simple appeal arising out of an incident which took place on the 19th December, 1969, in which the appellant is alleged to have pushed one Solita Forbes into the gutter as she was walking along the roadway. In an action brought by Solita Forbes the respondent against the appellant the learned trial magistrate on the 13th February, 1970, entered judgment for the plaintiff respondent in the sum of $15.00 and $13.88 costs.

2

The facts briefly were that three girls among whom was Stella Browne the appellant were waling together along this roadway. As the respondent approached them from the opposite direction Stella Browne detached herself from the group walked close up to the respondent and as she was about to pass her pushed her down into the canal at the same time using offensive language to her. The respondent protested loudly. A man Osmond Joshua who witnessed the incident supported the story of Solita Forbes at the trial.

3

The appellant who called no witnesses at the trial merely denied the incident. Counsel for the appellant today has urged that there was a conflict in the evidence of the two witnesses Solita Forbes and Osmond Joshua of so vital a nature that the learned magistrate ought never to have arrived at the decision to which he came. The learned magistrate had the witnesses before him; he saw them, and having assessed the degree of reliability which could be placed on the respective stories related by the witnesses came to his conclusion. Indeed there was overwhelming justification for the findings of fact which the trial magistrate came to and this Court cannot in the circumstances interfere with them. In my view this appeal must be dismissed with costs at $15.00.

4

K.L. Gordon

5

Chief Justice(Ag.)

CECIL LEWIS, J.A.
6

I agree.

P. Cecil Lewis
7

Justice of Appeal

ST. BERNARD, J.A.
8

I Agree.

9

E.L. St. Bernard

10

Justice of Appeal (Ag.)

To continue reading

Request your trial