Manawaiu Standard (PUBLISHED DAILY.) Suivant la verite. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1883. LIABELITY OF ROAD BOARES.

Manawatu Standard, Volume 4, Issue 285, 5 November 1883, Page 2

Manawatu Standard (PUBLISHED DAILY.) Suivant la verite. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1883. LIABELITY OF ROAD BOARES.

A. oasb ot' considerable importance asef mglhe* '^W^ftt^ Jßoad Boards toke eptheroa<i^ ndertneircontrolin repai r, and the rig ht P f .. P 6 ! 80 ' 118 * y 6 " cover^damages fo* . re^ltog. from,' fefectsin the" , TOadwa y> was de ' jerm^ ukL .miitly; ei * ur £ Mint lMd)i&i dl^^^B* dray wi* a load of . *tray* a long the side of aroa^,whentK yev c^ eel f nk . m » deep fff&j $ vMoK was . , «>™ r ft rm|< water ! r W otH^sible, i* e '***& - W overturn ed,a nd the horse b. adly injured. -ggft ,. &i^M™l &P damages.. T he, . Resident , i Magistrate deliverer' i a \ 7ritteh" jtrdgm«n *-■* : J " *• °° ,ftot thig ; i jbhf, ; 4 it this is a. kind pi , \ y f, *s* f that'w fflVa ! pport.a right of ictio ' n against ; tke defendant^ I fintf the.^oi, id had, ... b^en recently taken < ove J, by tb .c Roa< i Board, and was di^J forme ,d — not ; a - metalled' ;• that ' it ; wi- ;V parti- ally floi .jded^ so -that— no serioub ' irreg ( uiariti 7 es nii were visible^' 'and that instea dof usin g the crown of "the road^ whi eh for aj ay thing we know might hay c been pc the plaintiff ele cts to, dr, .live a high load of straw alf >ng the sid" 'eot the road j a deeper ,n) jit than nsu al occurs, and the dray ti orned over, j -injury to the: horse results i ng. Now;* 1 * ;it cannot contended ihat it was tl s *he '"duty of tlfeßoad.Bo'ard ! to provide a passable track oti side of the cr owe* of {the road; bo I^tbink, on that grom the verdict must be for d6fettitA'llantß;.^ ButlJamTasteSd tft; hold that a I load Board J.s liable under any circumst: ances for injury "'resulting m consequent cc of a road being out of

repair over >hioh it has control. I have caref ally consuitejfl the authorities quoted, arid I cannot nrf that 'they bear out stieh cp^ntentipn. .In tjie judgement of HMiHbj|pr J^ge^phiis^n,^, P e^^ap«;i@^u^g^ntp the case, as His Honor says, is the question as to whethar the defendants were. t aff acted, with knowledge of -the, bridge /Jltis not shown heVe, noriis'ii contended, that the defendants knew of the defect m the rbadr^TEe"Xustralian case relied upon by -the learned counsel ...f°l.lhe.plwnt^.shvWß.&ots.yery».diffet*ent from those under consideration. There the defendants had undertaken works which |had broken down, of whicli they Had full knowledge, and which! tne/neglected to repair or.S9cure hy feacmgf- UnderitKese . circumstances the defendants -w«re held liable. In the case before me a judgment for the plaintiff would mean that a Road Board isbouhdtb^place^Lroadd and tracks! under its control m a thorough statepf repair, and to maintain them : m that condition ; and,, : shat e .../ whenever an accident involving damage occurred on any road,, undert its control (whether such road was or .was not formed* or metalled, or kept m repair) the Board , isj)ojind;to beheld liable. ' If thai; H Bty Road Boards would soon be institutions of the past. Judgment for the defendants; with; costs!"-