DAMAGES CLAIM

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Issue 165, 30 July 1937, Page 7

DAMAGES CLAIM

-Press Association.l

Sequel To Motor-Car Collision FARMER SEEKS £2159

(Bv Telegraph-

PALMERSTON N., This Day. As a sequel to a collision between two motor-cars on the Foxton-Shannon road on December 24, 1936, the hearing of a claim for £2159 damageB was commenced in the Supreme Court at Palmerston North yesterday. Plaintiff was Stanley Robert Silk, of Foxton, xarin manager, and defendant Thomas Ropoama, of Shannon, slaughtejman. The Chief Justice, Sir Michael Myers, presided. Mr. H. R. Cooper, with him Mr. M. B. Bergin, of Foxton, appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. H. F. O'Leary, of Wellington, with him Mr. K. N. Ptvathers, for defendant. The following jury was empaneiied: Messrs. A. Bamberg (foreman), G. J 'Smith, W. Hartis, S. Sutton, C. Powell, S. K. Moffatt, H, H. Andrew, P. T. Jamieson, A. E. Lowe, A. H. Drummond, A. M. Dale, T. Harley. In his statement of claim plaintiff alleged that the collision was due to the reckless and unskilful manner in which defendant 's car was being driven, par.ticular allegations being f'ailure to keep to the left as far as possible, dxiving at an excessive speed in the circumstances, failing to stop, slow down or steer clear, failing to keep a proper look-out and losing control of the car. .Plaintiff stated he had suffered concussion, severe injuries to his right wrist and left hand, and numerous cuts and extensive bruising, neeessitating hospital and medical care and attention, his -left hand was, and would be, partially Jincapacitated. Plaintiff 'a wife, Mrs. Kathryn Silk, had been a passenger with lxim and had been very severely injured and would suffer permanent disability of her right leg and left hand. As a result, plaintiff had had to engage '^tssistance for her and would hav® to continue to do so. Plaintiff stated also that he had lost and would lose, for their married life, the full services and society of his wife. Plaintiff had incurred fees for hospital and medical treatment, and travelling expenses, and his car had been totally destroyed, while he had also to engage and pay for farm assistance. Plaintiff therefore claimed as special damages £159 18s. The gen'eral damages claimed amounted to £2000, of which £1500 was in respect of |the loss of his wife's seryices. The defence was first a general dejnial. For a f urther defence it was alleg•ed particularly that the collision was sdue to plaintiff failing to keep to the left as far as possible, driving at an excessive speed under the circumstances, failing to keep his car under proper cdntrol, failing to keep a proper lookout and failing to stop, slow down or' steer clear. After both Mr. Cooper and Mr. O'Leary had briefly outlined the cases to be presented by both parties, the jury was taken to view the scene of the collision. His Honour told the jury that the case was one of a series. Evidence for plaintiff was tendered in the afternoon, and the Court adjourned for the day with defendant 's case in progress.