ACTION SUCCEEDS

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 8, Issue 17, 17 October 1944, Page 5

ACTION SUCCEEDS

SEQUEL TO COLLISION

ELECTION DAY INCIDENT

J. McComb and taxi proprietors (Mr Otley) successfully claimed the sum of £10 (£7 5s repairs and £2 15s general

loss) from J. K. H. Whitehead

(Mr Barry) driver of a car which was' involved in a collision on May 27 (Local Body Election Day) at last Tuesday's sitting of the Whakatane Magistrate's Court before Mr E. L. S.M.

Stanley McLcod manager of the Plaintiff Company ; said in evidence that he was a passenger in one ol the firm's ears on the day in ques tion. The car was travelling behind a white car which was being used by the local branch ol' the Laboui Party for the purpose of bringing voters to the polls. As tliey over hauled, this car ,in front of the Borough Council Chambers,, it had without any warning swerved right across their path. His driver had endeavoured to avoid an accident, but the white car had struck the rear section of the. taxi arid damaged it. Witness had got out and ascertained that defendant who was driving the other car had all hi: J windows jammed up hard a*significant feature which must, have made it impossible, for him to signal the •car into the pavement. It was rain ing heavily at the time. Witness had not said anything to Whitehead but had taken the matter up witl the local branch of the Party concerned. To Mr Barry 4he would swear that no signal had been giver by and was positive ol this as the double windscreen wipei in his car was operating. Roy Owen Martin the taxi drivei gave corroborative evidence. The defence was that defendant had signalled his intention of swing ing into the roadway at the side, of the Council Chambers, as defendant had an elderly voter aboard and desired to bring her into the kerb. Mr Barry submitted that there was an onus on all car drivers that day to keep a special look-out when passing the booth and definitely a duty •J' on taxi drivers to do so. Instead Martin had elected to try and pass the car right outside the booth. Counsel also claimed that there was no evidence before the court show ing that the amount sued for wa. 1 that actually involved in the cost of repairs resulting from the accident.

Defendant in evidence declared that he had given the signal thai he was about to turn in but thai

as the cars came to a halt he had put the window up again as the rain was pouring in when he had reached the Borough right-of-way.

The court awarded the full amouni of the claim plus court costs amounting to £3 10s 6d.