Corliss v Gibbings-Johns

Corliss v Gibbings-Johns involved an appeal by the appellant, a publican of a hotel, against a finding of liability for an injury to the respondent, who had broken into the hotel after it had closed. The respondent claimed that after breaking a window, the appellant threw a glass object at him, causing a penetrating eye injury. The appellant denied throwing any object at the respondent. The trial judge concluded that the appellant had thrown a glass object, leading to the injury.

The appeal raised two main issues. Firstly, the appellant sought to rely on statutory defences that were not raised at the trial, which the respondent argued should not be considered on appeal. Secondly, the appellant contested the trial judge's finding that the two witnesses who could exonerate him were not credible, despite their accounts being truthful. The appellant argued that the trial judge had erred in his assessment of the witnesses' credibility.

The court held that points and objections not taken below could not be raised on appeal. The statutory defences were not pleaded or argued at trial, and thus, the appellant could not rely on them on appeal. Furthermore, the court found that the trial judge's findings of fact, particularly regarding the credibility of witnesses, were not open to interference unless there was a clear error. The court held that the trial judge had not erred in his assessment of the witnesses' credibility.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.