220 DAMAGES UNDER EMPLOYERS LIABILITY ACT. 



held that evidence of the manner m which an injury has 

 been caused, is not to be excluded by an admission of 

 liability, (a) 



173. New Trial. — A new trial will be granted if the 

 verdict of the jury is contrary to evidence, (6) or inconsistent 

 or self-contradictory ; (c) but the Court will not interfere with 

 a verdict except in very special circumstances on the ground 

 of excess or deficiency of the sum awarded. " The remedy 

 of setting aside the verdict of a jury is provided for the pur- 

 pose of preventing a miscarriage of justice, and it is granted 

 only in cases Avhere the damages are so large that the jury 

 must be held to have taken into account elements which they 

 ought not to have considered, or to have given too large a 

 sum from leaving out of consideration elements which ought 

 to have been kept in view." {d) Lord President Inglis 

 observed : — " It seems to me that unless it can be said that 

 the verdict ought not to have been for more than one-half of 

 the sum awarded, there is not, according to our practice, any 

 room for interference. " (e) 



174. Damages Recoverable under the Employers 

 Liability Act. — Under the Employers Liability Act, 1880,(/) 

 § 3, the sum recoverable is not to exceed such sum as may 

 be found to be equivalent to the estimated earnings during 

 the three years preceding the injury, of a person in the same 

 grade employed during those years in the like emplojaiient, 

 and in the district m which the workman is employed at the 

 time of the injury. The action is not maintainable unless 

 notice that injury has been sustained is given within six 



(a) Morton, cit. ; Dobie v. Aberdeen R>j. Co., 1856, 18 D. 862. 



(b) Mackay, ii. 66. 



(c) Steicart v. Cal. Ry. Co., 1870, 8 M. 486. 



{d) Per Lord M'Lareu in Young v. Glasgow Tramicays Co., 1882, 10 R. 242, 

 243. 



(e) Per Lord President Inglis in Young, cit. 245. 

 (/) 43 & 44 Vict. c. 42, § 3. 



