IMPORTANT POINT

Hokitika Guardian, 17 May 1932, Page 6

IMPORTANT POINT

IN INSURANCE CLAIM

HTS

WELLINGTON,. May 14

Holding that the late Mr Wiggis’ motor-car was in an unsafe or daniagd condition because of its defective fights, at the time of *its colds'-on with Dr Findlater’s car on the Hutt 'Road at midnight on November 17, 1930, the Chief Justice, R't. Hon. .Sir Michael Myers, in a reserved judgment delivered in the Supreme Court yesterday, dismissed a claim for £IOOO damages brought by Marjorie L’Estrange Trickett,?. daughter of the late Mr Wig-gs, a'gainst the Queensland insurance Co., Ltd.

The plaintiff claimed to recover the £IOOO under a “private motor-vehie'e insurance policy” issued by the defendant company to the late Mr Wings. “The whole contest,” said h’s Honour, “turns on the true construction of certain words in ’the policy and the application of those words to the facts of the case. By the policy it was set out that if-, the insured was injured by an accident sustained in cl’rect connection with the motor-vehicle, the company would pay to the insured or his legal personal representative £IOOO if the accident, within three months, should be the direct and immediate cause of the death of the insured.

Prima facie, said his Honour, the case came within those words, but til© defendant company relied on the following general exception contained in the policy

“Provided always, and it is hereby expressly agreed and declared that no liability in respect of any personal accident to the insured occurring while any motor-vehicle in connection with which indemnity is granted under this policy is being driven in a damaged or unsafe condition.” | The Chief Justice said he was compelled to the conclusion that the exception applied and that the claim therefore failed. Even if knowledge were material, it seemed to his Honour that the deceased ought to have • known of Che defective condition of the lights of his car an appreciable' time before the collision. There was no need for him to proceed on his journey. 'He could have stopped and obtained assistance by having the first passing car and sending a message to the nearest garage, or Ike' could have gone, or sent one of his passenger-, -to Ihe nearest telephone ; or he might possibly have obtained a tow from a passing car. Be all that as it may, the car was in an unsafe—or damaged and unsafe—condition, and he cont’nued to drive it on his journey to Wellington. It was not) even .suggested that he was driving it to a garage to have the defect seen to. On the contrary, the. ea.se mad© for the plaintiff was that there was no defect and that the lights were alight.