Off-Side Road Rule Defined By Judge

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 768, 14 September 1929, Page 6

Off-Side Road Rule Defined By Judge

DRIVER’S LIABILITY BYWAY AND HIGHWAY Press Association PALMERSTON N., Today. In the course of a judgment in a motor collision case between Alan McKenzie Black and Elizabeth and John McFarlane, wherein plaintiff was awarded damages, his Honour Mr. Justice Smith discussed at length the obligations of drivers on country roads in regard to the observance of the offside rule. Black's father was driving alv»ug the Rongotea Road, and defendant's son along the main Koxton-Sanson highway The collision occurred at an intersection. His Honour said the regulation regarding the offside rule, No. 13, appeared to apply at present to the whole of New Zealand, and the regulations made by any local authority relating to motor-vehicles were subject to the regulations under the Act. It was clear, then, that regulation 13 had a wide operation, and applied to all roads and streets, whether main or side, and whether in town, city, or country. The effect of its operation, however, raised a more difficult question. It " was a statutory traffic regulation, but at the same time, his Honour held, a breach of it could give no right of action to the person aggrieved by virtue merely of the breach. In relation to the present regulation, his Honour considered the duty imposed upon motorists was a public duty. PEDESTRIANS, TOO The regulation conferred no rights on any special class of the public, but was for motorists and pedesj trians alike. Furthermore, it was clear that in civil actions based on j negligence, the failure to observe the rule of the road might be justified by | circumstances, although no such exemption was provided by the terms : of the regulation itself. The regulation did not confer upon any party aggrieved the civil right | of action by virtue merely of a breach thereof. The remedy for a breach 1 was the police remedy. A big pen- ' alty was provided by the regulations. It did not follow, however, that a breach of the traffic regulation might not be used as evidence cf ; gonce in a civil action. “Where a distiiu «• ween main’ and side* roads c i th# offside rule applied, it is that main-road traffic must give way to side-road traffic approaching from tho right and with which there is a possibility of collision, and if necessary for that purpose must stop. I setno escape from this construction. It appears to be intended to lay down a definite rule, but the difficulty arise* in its application. HIGHWAY SPEED “Main road traffic is entitled to move at a good speed and bitumen and i concrete highways are intended to carry fast-moving traffic, yet where an i intersection is reasonably visible to a driver on the main road or where he j should reasonably know of its existence, it is, I think, his duty to take ] steps to observe this rule. But if the possibility of a collision arises where the intersection is not so ; visible or where the driver is reasonably unaware of its existence, he is not in a reasonable position to take steps to observe the rule. Then whatever may be the driver's position in the Police Court, he has not committed a wilful or a negligent breach of the rule and the breach of it cannot be used as prima facie evidence against him. “The test of a wilful or negligent breach of the rule must depend on the circumstances of each case. Where the view of the intersection is clear and the driver knows there is or is likely to be traffic, the driver approaching from a side road on the right of the driver on the main road may be entitled to assume the main road driver will give way.” 1 Referring to the case in question, his Honour said, “I do not think plaintiff’s driver, as a side-road driver, had any right to assume that the ‘offside’ rule would necessarily be observed by the main-road driver passing along - this particular main highway through the country. That is not, it appears to me, a reasonable assumption to make until the ‘offside’ rule is more [ emphatically established by custom and usage on country roads. I do not think the same assumption can be’ made as a driver in a city street might make. The side road driver | in the country must act reasonably and from the point of view of his civil liability slow up, so as to be able to avoid traffic to right or left.”