R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume IX, Issue 3032, 18 October 1888, Page 3

R.M. COURT.

mAterton-thuksday, . -- Mr S, Von Stunner E.M) W. NEILt V. CaMEHTON'TaHATAIH • Eoad District. '; ~-ilisWorship gavp judgment tbis 1-* < ' toidMng in tho ease,. W. Neill, of Jle2m'lon, livery stablo keeper v, the Mabitants of tbo Cartcrton-Taratahi Koad. District, in which tho plaintiff sougut recover the sum of £ls for injury io a horse, through non-repair ' of a road on tlio Taratahi. ! ■ In giving judgment, His Worship said in this case tho liability, if any, i cap arise only through tho neglect of somo duly owed by the ' t defendants to the plaintiff as it' '■ ' is plain there is no contract between the parties. In somo cases tho neglect i. 'of a perform a statutory ('■ 'duty gives a person suffering speohil !'• • and particular injury from such neg- '■ Ject, a right of action against the corporation,and in New Zealand it has ( - been held in the case cited for the j. : plaintiff (l'ascoov. Post Levy Koad 1 SBHK4 LJL, 5.0,160) tbat aßoad \ : Boarais liable in an action of damages [;. for non-repair, In tho case of a I county road, however, the statutory I duty to repair (if any) lies; in the !'/:- county; and ,if the county delegate l' that duty to another, it seoms; clear k - that tho dolegato docs.not ttiereby I.V-. ■:• : Ji

undertakoaduty to any porson oxccp 1 to'the County. It is truo that goner filly in notions for tort, ',he sorvant is equally liable with the employer to a person injured by the net of the servant done in tho course of the employment. But this principle has no application to tho caso ol ah injury caused not by a direct wrongful act, but by mere neglect to perform a statutory duty. Tho corporation bavin? tho duty mil not tho servant, Tho Court considers tho Highway Board is not liable in an aotion for negligence, for non-repair, this being a county road, and that tlio I .' plaintiff should bo nonsuited, with costs of solicitor £\ Is,