Where, in proceedings before arbitrators, there is a real conflict of evidence, no question of law (within the meaning of that expression in sec. 19 of the Arbitration Act 1915) arises as to the sufficiency of the evidence to justify any finding, and no such question arises even if the evidence (at all events if it be wholly or partially oral) is all on one side if on that side is the onus of proof, but the question of whether there is, or is not, any evidence upon which there might properly be a finding in favour of the person on whom is the onus of proof may be a question of law.