CLAIM FOR DAMAGES

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Issue 79, 20 April 1937, Page 7

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES

— PresB Asnociatfon,)

Question of; Contributory Negligence •APPEAL DISMISSED

(By Teleeraph

j WELLINGTON, April 19. Judgment in tbo case of'Ling Bing v. Tbomas Walton Bobertwn was de•livered by tbe Court of Appeal to-dayf :The judgment was delivered by Mr Juatiee U»tier, wbose judgment was agreed witb by Mr Justiee Jobnson and in a scparato judgment by Mr Justiee Smitb. Tbe case arqse out of a cqjllision. As to * point made by appellaut tbat upon xespondeat's Own evidenpq be was guilty of contributory neglb gence debarrjpg his yigbt to recover damages from respondent, it was hejd tbere was ample evidenee to justify tbe jury in acoepting respondent Btatement of fact tbat tbe lorry qf nppellant bad left no room on tbe road for Mm to pass anj, therefore, to bold that as tbe vaccident would bave bappened wherever respondent had been on tbe road, bis negligence in not travelling to tbe extreme left was not contributory negligence. On tbe question of whetber appellant wa» entitled to a new trial on tbe grpund tbat tbe jury's verdict was defective, it was stated tbat tbe answer to tbe first issue was not a very intelligpnt qso, but in view of the course whicb tho frial tOOk the answer was not realjy so ambiguous that it« meaning could not be gathered witb reasonable certainty. Tbe appeal must be dismjssed witb eogtg on tbe bigbfft scale.