Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES

———» SIMULTANEOUS NEGLIGENCE. In the Magistrate's Court yesterdayMr. W. G. Kiddell. S.M., delivered reserved judgment in the case in which H. W. Trotnian, agent, proceeded against Hewson and Sons, engineers, to recover <£75 damages to a motor-car caused by a collision with a taxi-car'driven by defendants, which occurred near theLumbton Station on Juno 5. Defendants cr-un--ter-claimed for ,£ll4. In his judgment Mr. Riddell said that the position of the cars at the time of the collision did not help much in determining upon whran I the blame for it should fall, and the weight of evidence showed that although', both were travelling slowly, yet defendant had almost stopped when the impact took place. Plaintiff was on his , correct side, and naturally assumed that defendant would give way, owing to the; fact that he was crossing to the righthand side o£ the rond, and was consequently going towards his wrong side.. • Defendant was, however, following the* usual route taken by drivers at this particular place, and the rule of the road was not an arbitrary one. but one of convenience, which might be disregarded, provided drivers exorcispd the requisite, amount of care when 'driving in that, position. Defendant might have been, negligent in continuing to cross to the--wrong side of the road when' he saw plaintiff's signal, but later when defendant was close to the kerb he misht have; avoided the accident by stopping, and: failure on his part to do this amounted to contributing negligence. His Worship, continuing, said that after considering the evidence he had come to the conclusion that the accident was due tojoint and simultaneous negligence on thev part of both the plaintiff and defendant,, and neither could recover from the other. Judgment was given for defendant on the claim, and for the plaintiff on the counter-claim. No costs were allowed. At the hearing Mr. T. Neave atmeared for plaintiff, and Mr. H. P. O'Leary for defendant.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19170822.2.49

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3170, 22 August 1917, Page 6

Word count
Tapeke kupu
322

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3170, 22 August 1917, Page 6

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3170, 22 August 1917, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert