APPEAL COURT

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 175, 13 April 1918, Page 3

APPEAL COURT

« A QUESTION OF TITLE A DARGAVILLE ACCIDENT 1 Argument was concluded before the Court of Appeal yosterday in the appeal involving tho right' to possession of a block of land in the parish of Pepepe, county of Raglan. The parties ivero Angus M'Kinnon and Samuel Hesketh (appellants), as executors in the will of Donald M'Kinnon, of Ohinewa'i, deceased, and Jessie Craig (respondent), as executrix in the will of Alexander Campbell,,of Auckland, deceased. There wore on the Bench tlie Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) and Their Honours Mr. Justice Edwards, Mr. Justice Chapman, and Mr. Justice Sim. ■ Mr. H. D. Bamford, of Auckland, appeared for the appellants, and Mr. C. V P. Skerrett, K.C., with hiln Mr. M. J. Crombie, for the respondent. After hearing lengthy legal argument the Court reserved its decision. A DISPUTED COLLISION. In the Appeal Court yesterday, the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) and Their Honours Mr. Justice Chapman and Mr. Justice Sim heard a case on appeal arising out of a collision between two automobiles at Dargaville. The appellant was S. 0. Colmore-Wil-liams, for whom Mr. A. K. Blair appeared, and the respondent, John Weir, was represented by Mr. H. D. Bamford, of Auckland.

On August 19, 1916, whilst Weir was driving his motor-car in a public highway at Dargaville, Co'more-Williams (the.respondent), through negligence it was alleged, drove into him. The resultwas that Weir's car was overturned into the Wairoa River, the driver' (Weir) had his arm severely injured, and his car damaged to the extent of £97 12s. 3d. In the Magistrate's Court at Dargaville Weir claimed £183 is. 9d. The Magistrate (Mr. ]?. J. Burgess) gave judgment 'for Williams, as defendant, holding that no accident would have occurred if Weir had not improperly tried too soon to regain his pos'ition on the road and turned the front wheel of his car for tliat purpose towards the defendant's car before that car had completely passed. In a subsequent appeal Mr. Justice Cooper reversed the Magistrate's decision and gave judgment for AVeir. Against this latter decision the respondent, Colmore-Williams, now appealed. In his judgment Mr. Justice Cooper held that the substantial cause of the accident was the negligence of Colmore-Williams in driving past Weir's car approximately at such a rate of speed and so close to that carl a? to render it extremely probable that an accident would happen; that this conduct placed Weir in a position of difficulty and peril, and was substantially the proximate cause- of the accident, for under such circumstances "perfect presence of mind, accurate judgment, and promptitude were not to be expected"; and that'the fact that Weir evidently. lost his presence of mind and accurate judgment ought not to be treated as contributory negligence. Colmore-Williams had driven past Weir's car at a rate at least, 20 miles an hour, and so closely to that car that the. space between the two vehicles was only six inches. His Honour therefore gave judgment against Colmore-Williams, the appellant in the present action. After hearing legal argument the Court adjourned till Monday, when further consideration will -be given to the case. 5 r