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

ACCIDENT ON WHARF.

JURY AWARDS DAMAGES. CASE AGAINST HARBOUR BOARD. After a lengthy hearing occupying three days, the case in which Frederick Hoy and Robert Lee Bennett, wharf labourers (Mr. O'Regan and Mr. Sullivan) each claimed £500 damages from the Auckland Harbour Board (Mr. McVeagh) for injuries sustained on March 21, 1927, as a result of a bale of goods falling, was concluded in the Supreme Court yesterday. Mr. Justice Blair and a jury of twelve considered the case. The jury retired after counsel's addresses and his Honor's summing up at 5.50 o'clock last evening and returned at 10.15 with a verdict in favour of plaintiffs. It awarded damages totalling £494 2/ to Bennett and £491 6/6 to Hoy. 9 His Honor said that the law that when a person was invited on to another's premises he was entftled to have the premises to which he was invited reasonably safe. Referring to the question of the safety of the chute from which the goods fell, his Honor said that the plaintiffs had both admitted that they knew the chute was unsafe. In this case the onus of proof was on the board. If the men were entitled to damages, they were also entitled to hospital expenses to what they might fairly have earned during their 18 months of disablement, and to some allowance for their pain and suffering. .

Nine issues were submitted to the jury, which eventually presented its findings to the registrar in the absence of the judge. By ten to two the jury found the accident was due to negligence on the part of the board, and by eleven to one specified the negligence as not providing sufficient protection to prevent goods going over the side of the chute, and not rroviciuig sufficient supervision over the class of goods going down the chute. By nine to three the jury agreed that the board knew the chute was unsafe. It also found that the plaintiffs were not guilty of contributory negligence and that'the. board had exercised due care in the selection of its officers.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19280331.2.162

Bibliographic details

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 77, 31 March 1928, Page 14

Word Count
345

ACCIDENT ON WHARF. Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 77, 31 March 1928, Page 14

ACCIDENT ON WHARF. Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 77, 31 March 1928, Page 14

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