TRAM STOPS SUDDENLY

Dominion, Volume 20, Issue 60, 4 December 1926, Page 28

TRAM STOPS SUDDENLY

A PASSENGER INJURED AWARDED £l2O DAMAGES As a result of an accident wlrrii o> urred on a uouble-decKed on xlay 6 last, Francis Roberts ua&uen proceeded against the Wellington City Corporation oeiore ms Honour Mr. Justice MacGregor in the Supreme Court yesterday. The plaintiff was represented oy Mr. O. C- aiazengarb, while Air. J. O'bhea, city solicitor, appeared for the letendant corporation. The plaintiff, in his statement of claim stated that on May 6, 1926, he was a passenger on an electric tiamcai pwned by the defendant corporation. He claimed that the corporation did not safely and securely carry him, but so negligently and unskilfully managed the tramcar that it was without warning brought to a sudden stop near the junction of Mansfield Street and Russell Terrace, Newtown. As a result of the sudden stoppage of the tramcar, the plaintiff was thrown violently forward, and struck his head against a portion of the tramcar, receiving injuries to his bead and hearing, and to his nervous system. While pleading that the onus was on the defendant corporation to explain the reason for the sudden stoppage of the tramcar the plaintiff claimed, firstly, that the corporation, through its servants, negligently allowed the overhead gear at the place where the accident occurred to be out of date and defective. He claimed, also, that at the time of the accident, again through the negligence of the corporation's servants, the overhead gear was not in a condition to allow the tramcar to proceed properly upon its journey. It was claimed, also, that notwithstanding the defective overhead gear the tramcar should not have been stopped so suddenly. The plaintiff claimed that as a result of tlio accident he bad suffered great pain, and had been put to expenditure or hospital and medical attendance, and prevented from pursuing his occupation. He had thus lost the salary which he would otherwise have earned, and would be partially incapacitated for some time to come. Special and general damages to the amount of £4lt 18s. were claimed as compensation for the injuries received and the losses incurred by the plaintiff as a result of the accident. Mr. O. C. Mazengarb, on behalf ot the plaintiff; stated that he would have to withdraw the claim for damages as far as the alleged permanent injury to hearing in one of the plaintiff’s ears waS concerned, owing to the fact that he had recently ascertained that the plaintiff had been playiAg the fool with the medical experts. It was now definitely estab ♦ bed that no such permanent injury had been received. Thus what damages were claimed were to cover the plaintiff’s loss of wages. Hospital expenses, and a reasonable allowance for pain ' and suffering.' The defence consisted in a general denial of the plaintiff’s claim* Mr. O’Shea, on behalf of the defendant corporation, objected to the manner in which Mr. Mazengarb had withdrawn the claim for damages on account of permanent injury which it had been alleged had been done to the plaintiff’s hearing. “I think it is an astounding thing,’’ he said, "that I should come here prepared to meet a case of ma. lingering, only to be told by Mr. Mazengarb that this claim has been removed.” His Honour: Well, you ought to be very pleased.■

"Reeks of Deception.” Mr. O’Shea stated that it was claimed by the defence that the plaintiff bad not been injured in any way us seriously an be suggested. In regard to damages, it was claimed that the plaintiff had been shamming all the time. Counsel considered that there had been no negligence on the part of the corporation. What had happened was that the spring on top of the frog br»:e, and naturally the trolley-pole ran off ilie line it should have been on. The accident was one of those which no one could account for It was the soft of happening which could not be prevented. His Honour: But you can prevent bringing up the car so quickly that you knock people about. Mr. O’Shea: But it is a rule to pull up quickly when the lights go out. His Honour: I am afraid I cannot help that. If people are injured you will have to pay for it. Mr. O’Shea: This man has been shamming from start to finish. That is the mecjical evidence. Mr. Mazengarb: In the car when ho fell down? Mr. O’Shea: Yes. Hie whole attitude has been that of deception and'attempt to defraud. „ , . His Honour: You say ho uas not hurt at all? , Mr. O’Shea: I do not say that, Your Honour. I say he might have, had a smack But he was not injured in the wav he said. The whole case reeks of deception, Your Honour. His Honour: Why was he kept in the hospital if he was shamming?. Before bringing his case, during which a number of witnesses were examined, to a conclusion, Mazengarb stated that he would reduce the special damage asked for by the plaintiff by £6 6s„ thus making the total damages claimed £467 15s. , Mr. O’Shea called several witnesses, bv some of whom expert evidence was given, after which counsel briefly addressed ftis Honour on the main points at 'issue. . _. _ After a short retirement His Honour delivered his judgment "There is no doubt," be said, "that the plaintiff has grossly exaggerated his damages, particularly the alleged injuries to hie sight and his hearing, but there is equally no doubt that he has suffered some injuries, more especially to his nervous system, which even now appears not to be in a very good state." ftis Honour stated that he assumed that the apparatus used was the best possible, but he did not consider that it tad been kept in perfect order. There was a broken spring in the apparatus which had not been discovered prior to the accident, and there was no evidence to show for how long that state of affairs had been going on It was quite clear, said His Honour, that there had been no regular weekly inspection in the case under dispute. In regard to damages, His Honour said that ho was satisfied that the plaintiff had sustained serious injury, and had proved loss of wages and medical expenses! As fai as general damages were concerned. His Honorr did not think that they merited much attention. He accordingly gave judgment for plaintiff for £l2O, with costs on the lowest scale.