SUPREME COURT

Hokitika Guardian, 30 October 1929, Page 8

SUPREME COURT

VIEWS OF NEGLIGENCE. (By Telegraph-—Per Press Association.) PALMERSTON N., October 29. Indications of the viewpoint he took in 'determining what constituted ; neajligentfe by a motor driver, was given by'Justice Blair in the Supreme Court when in the course of a charge to the Grand Jury he referred to a case of alleged negligent driving by a motorist in which a death was involved. “It has been suggested that in order to constitute negligence ‘it is necessary to prove criminal negligence, that‘is of an aggravated kind,” commented his Ho:our. “I don’t think that' is so. The law as I understand it, is that laid down by statute, that if a person is in charge of a motor vehicle capable of endangering another person, where an accident is due to negligence, in my opinion it is not necessary to prove ordinary' criminal negligence, but merely that the driver failed to carry out obligatory duties. The statute itself lays down quite clearly what is the duty of a driver: It states everyone who has in charge or under control anything which, whether animate "or inanimate, in the, absence of precautions care may endanger human life*, is under a legal obligation to take reasonable care. Failure to do that constitutes negligence whicli is sufficient to establish a breach of the statutory duty of a driver.” I desire to make it quite plain that I do not subscribe to-the doctrine that there is any greater measure of ( duty in civil than in a criminal case.' PALMERSTON N,, October 29. The quarterly session of the ' Supreme Court was opened to-day Justice Blair who said the district was maintaining its, reputation as a law abiding community. True hills were found against Wm. Wallace' Clifford, alleged breaking and entering to commit a crime; Norman Alfred Miller, alleged sheep stealing; Charles Rob-1 ertson, allegedly causing d-ath by negligent or reckless driving. A difference in the last case, arose out of the death of a gatekeeper of the Gorge bridge near Woodville. The Grand Jury commented that {'he method of operating the gate contributed in their opinion to the death of Symonds. They considered the gate should be mechanically operated in order to safeguard the operator. ! ■.!