COUNTY'S LIABILITY

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Issue 44, 8 March 1937, Page 5

COUNTY'S LIABILITY

Accidents on Roads Under Repair RECENT CIVIL ACTION A Supreme Court civil action at Wellington recently, when a jury of 12 awarded £363 0/10 general damages and £27 4/6 speeial damagies to a Wellington motorist who had an accident on a Toad under' repair in the Eketahuna County, was recalled at this morning' s meeting _ of the Hawke's Bay County Council. The chairman, Mr F. B. Logan, expressed the view that the jury's finding that the Eketahuna County Council had been guilty of negligence opened up a seriousi matter, in that a county council went in danger of facing o prosecution every time a motorist had an accident when road repair work was in progress- The council deeided to ask the New Zealand Counties' Association whether it intended to interest itself in the Supreme Court hearing particularly in the light of securing protection against future legal proceedings being taken under similar circumstances. Mr Logan read to counclllors a Presa report of the action in question- The case arose out of a motor accident on March 22, 1936, as a result of which the plaintiff stistained permanent partial disability of the right hand. It was claimed that the accident was the result of negligence on the part of the Eketahuna County Council in that it failed to make safe for traffie, a section of highway under repair. The car skidded on the surface, which was stated to be in a very greasy and oily condition. "It looks as if we may either have

to close a road under repair or stand the racket," observed Mr Logan. Mr W. Tucker; I thought there would be an appeal against that decision. It puts county councils in rather an awkward position. Mr Logan; Yes. There must have been hundreds of cars travelling over that road that day, and surely if those escaped, the road could not have been very dangerous. On Mr Logan's motion. seconded by Cr. Tucker, it was agreed to refer the matter to the Counties' Association. Mr E. H. Beamish recalled travelling over one section of road a little north of Pahiatua in April, 1936.* It was being bitumised and there was no section set aside for the use of the public. That stretch, he alleged, was certainly unsafe for traffic. Mr Tucker, speaking of the section of road referred to in the Supreme Court action, stated that he motored over it during the course of the work and in his opinion every possible precaution had been taken to ensure the safety of the public. Mr S. Palmer said that he also motored over the road at the time and found men stationed every few chains along th© work. Where cars were travelling over 15 miles an hour they were immediately flagged to reduce their speed.