JURY OUT IN CLAIM FOR DAMAGES

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Issue 33, 23 February 1937, Page 5

JURY OUT IN CLAIM FOR DAMAGES

Mechanic's Action Against Solicitor INJURIES IN COLLISION The jury. had not returned when the Herald-Tribune went to press .this atternOon in the civil action before Mr Justice Ostler in ihe Supreme Court at Napier by Eoy Fissenden, of Waipawa, motor meijhanic, against Henry Oram, of Palmerston North,- solicitor, for damages totalling £2566 14/- for injuries allegedly received in a motor accident. The Court sat until 10 o 'clock last night, and the jury retired at 10.47 this morning. Plaintiffi is represented by Mr G. G. E. Harker, and def endant by Mr J. O. Mazengarb. In hia defence, Mr Mazengarb said that the brakes on his client's car, at the moment a£ impaet, had sustained a broken hydraulic brake-rod. The accelerator had immediately gone on, and the car leapt forwatd. Thia was the cause of the long skid-mark after the eollision, He contended that the plaintifi had not completed his obligation of proving negligenee, and alleged eontributory negligeiiCe by McGreevy, driver of the vehicle in which .the. plaintiffi . was travelling. ".The plaintiff says that his in jury Was caused by the def endant Oram," said his Honour. "He must prove that the defendant was guilty of negligenee, and that that negligenee caused the injuries of the plaintiff. The defendant is alleged to have been travelling at sueh an excessive speed that he was unable to obey the right-hand rule in regard to the other car, which obviously entered the intersection before or at the same time as the defendant 's ' car. The point was further on than the middle oi the intersection. "The speed of Oram's car was, according to one witness, 40 miles an hour, and I gathered from Mr Mazengarb 'u a.ddresa that he &|.mitted this. Oonstable Moss gave his^evidence intelligently and fairly, yat he says the ear travelled 62 fee.t after the brakes were applied, and the remaifiing speed of the car after .the impact, claims Mr Harker, shows that it was still going fast. X think that you can ignore the latter, ae it appears eertain that the brake rod did break, and with the pedal falling flat it is probable that the car aceelerated. "Suppose you decide that Oram was negligent, yet think that McGreevy could still have avoided the accident by the exercise of xeasonable care; that his negligenee was later in point of time— then you should say that the injuries were not caused by. the negligenee of Oram," added his Honour. "If, however, you .decide thfct any negligenee of McGreevy was contemporaneous with that of Oram, that does uot prevent the plaintiff from recovering damages. "There is no evidence called for the defendant. Ihe main charge brought in the address against McGreevy is that he was going at an excessive speed, There is no evidence to show this." Following instructions regarding thp assessment of damages, the jury retired at 10.47 this morning.