Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

MOTOR COLLISION.

SUPREME COURT AWARDS DAMAGES. An action to recover £7OO from Samuel Brighouse, farmer, of Oringi (near Dannevirke), was brought by Emily Wallace, service car proprietress, of Palmerston N, in the Supreme Court at Palmerston North on Thursday. Mr. Justice Ostler was on the Bench, and plaintiff was represented by Mr. A. M. Ongley and defendant by Mr. I. L. Knight, of Dannevirke. The action was the result of a collision between plaintiff’s car and defendant’s motor-lorry at the Oringi railway crossing on December 9th last.

'Plaintiff, in her statement of claim, stated that she used a mo-tor-car in her business for the carriage of passengers between Napier and Wellington, and that defendant was the owner of a motorlorry used by him in connection with his calling as a farmer. The defendant, it was alleged, had, by his agent or servant, so carelessly driven his lorry that it collided with 2>lain tiff’s car, driven by her agent, IL Peat. It was alleged that defendant’s agent drove the lorry on the wrong side of the road and had Jailed to keep a proper look-out for approaching traffic, thus causing the lorry to collide with plaintiff’s car, which was driven at a reasonable pace on the correct side of the road. The car was damaged, stated the statement of claim, to such an extent that parts had to be obtained from America to enable repairs to be made. Plaintiff consequently had lost the use of it from December 9, 1927, and the ear had not yet been repaired. Plaintiff claimed £2OO, estimated cost of repairs to car; £3OO, loss of use of car; and £2OO depreciation in value of the car. For the defence it was claimed that the collision was caused by the careless and negligent driving of plaintiff’s agent, in that he had failed to keep a proper look-out for appi^Tachinjg traffic and had 'not sounded his horn at the corner. Defendant denied that he was liable for the act of his servant or that the collision was caused by careless, negligent, or unskilful driving. The jury returned with a verdict for plaintiff for £3OO. Judgment was given accordingly.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MH19280512.2.34

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 3791, 12 May 1928, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
360

MOTOR COLLISION. Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 3791, 12 May 1928, Page 3

MOTOR COLLISION. Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 3791, 12 May 1928, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert