LAW REPORTS

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2627, 24 November 1915, Page 9

LAW REPORTS

SUPREME COURT

MOTOR-CAR CASE

JUDGMENT FOR CITY COUNCIL

A claim for £501 damages, in respect of injuries to a motor-car through collision with a tramway pole; was concluded in the Supreme Court yesterday, before His Honour Mr. Justice Chapman, and a jury of twelve. Tho plaintiffs were Frederick Leo Fitzgerald, Albert Geo. Pearce, and Arthur Ernest Fitzgerald, motor-car proprietors, of Wellington, and the defendants the Wellington City Corporation. Mr. T. Neave appeared for the plaintiffs, and the City Solicitor (Mr. J. O'Shea) for the defendant corporation. The claim arose out of a collision of plaintiffs' motor-car, driven by ail employee, with a. tramway pole, in Jervois Quay, on the night of July 17 last. The night was dark, and as tho polo was not lighted, and was placed in the middle of tho road, the plaintiffs, ali leged that tho corporation were guilty of negligence. The jury considered the case for three hours, and Teturned with the following answers to the issues:—

Was the corporation guilty of, negligence (a): In not prbperly placing the pole?—" No."

(b) In not illuminating the pole?— "No , tut wo think it would be an additional safeguard if a small light was erected on the pole, to burn after the arc light is turned off."

(c) lii letting the lights go out?— "On tho, weight of evidence the lights were not turned off." (2) ; Was the street properly lighted at tn© time of the accident?—" Yes."

(3) Was the driver guilty of negliin.: (a) Not Replenishing his headlights?—'"No." .(b)-In continuing at the speed lie describes when he found-the square-dark (if such was tlio fact).—"Yes." Judgment was . accordingly entered for defendants, with costs as per scale as for a £250 claim, second daj £10 10s., with witnesses' expenses and disbursements to be fixed by arrangement with the Registrar. CLAIM AGAINST ESTATE. Before the ,Jqdge alone a claim for money alloged to be due was heard. The claim was for £292, alleged to be duo by George Pinnock, deceased, to Christopher Pinnock, for money lent, and for a billiard table and sideboard claimed to be owned by the plaintiff, and in tho possession of the deceased at the Columbia Private Hotel, at the time of his death. Tho plaintiff was Christopher Faimock (represented by Mr. E. G. Jellicoe), and tho defendants Thomas Dwan, as owner of the Columbia Hotel, and Beatrice Pinnock, widow of deceased, in possession of the 'hotel. In outlining the case for the plaintiff Mr. Jellicoe said that plaintiff's brother, who had control of the Columbia Hotel, died intestate in May last. The furniture and effects were mortgaged to Dwan Bros, for about £1000, in 1913, but they had no right of possession owing to the provisions of tlio Mortgage Extensions Act, 1914. In December, 1913, a month after the execution of the bill <jf sale, the plaintiff purchased a billiard table and entrusted it to his brother, on tho understanding that he should pay 30s. per week out of the takiiigs from the table. In 1914 plaintiff also lent his brother a sideboard. Neither of the articles mentioned were included in the mortgage to Dwan Bros. Deceased not only died intestate, but insolvent, and .the billiard table and sideboard were in his possession at the timo of his death. He was indebted to plaintiff, according to Mr. Jellicoe, to the extent of £292. One of the defendants was deceased's widow, and it was contended that ivith the consent of Dwan Bros, she continued to live in the hotel in charge of the contents. On September 16_ last Mr. Dwan made a sale of furniture, -including the billiard tablo and tho sideboard, for £1300.

'-Giving evidence deceased's widow said thatsho thought the billiard table was her husband's. The payments to Bird and Jensen, the sellers, were made from the hotel.

The case was not coucluded when the Court rose for the day.