SEQUEL TO COLLISION

Dominion, Volume 20, Issue 58, 2 December 1926, Page 3

SEQUEL TO COLLISION

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES SUCCEEDSDominion Special -Palmerston North, December 1. ..Before His Honour Mr. Justice Reed, in the Supreme Court to-day, Hugh Burrell, farmer, of Feildiug,- took action against Richard Palmer, farmer, of Feilding, claiming £527 16s. 6d. as special and general damages arising out of a motor-car accident between the parties. • Defendant made a coun-ter-claim for £146 as special and general damages. Plaintiff was represented by Mr. Treadwell, of Wellington, while Mr. A. M. Ongley (appeared on behalf of defendant. The statement of claim put forward was that on June 1, 1926, while plaintiff was driving his motor-car along the Kimbolton Road, on his correct side, lie was run into by defendant. It was alleged that defendant was at the time driving on the wrong side of the rqad, and at a furious pace, and was, therefore, guilty of negligence. As a result of the' accident plaintiff suffered severe bodily injury, while Ins car was practically destroyed. In defence it was stated that plaintiff had not been driving on his correct side of the road Also, it was denied that defendant had been guilty of anv neglicence as to the cause of the accident. It was contended that at the time of the collision defendant’s car was stationary, with all lights burning, and that consequently the accident was due to negligence on the part of plaintiff in driving at an excessive speed. As a further defence, contributory ■’negligence was pleaded. Defendant, as a result of the accident, had suffered bodily injury, necessitamg medical attention, while his car had been damaged. He, therefore, claimed £96 special and £5O general damages. After hearing evidence, His Honour held that defendant had been guilty of negligence in driving at.au excessive speed,, and gave judgment for plaintiff for £27 16s. 6d special damages, and £375 general damages.