MOTORING LAW.

Auckland Star, Volume LXV, Issue 221, 18 September 1934, Page 8

MOTORING LAW.

RIGHT-HAND RULE. "SOURCE OF ACCIDENTS." COMMENT BY JUDGE. "That is a very fruitful source of accidents. The right hand rule is an excellent one for directing traffic, but is very dangerous in the hands of a person who thinks he can barge through regardless of tho traffic on the left," remarked Mr. Justice Reed at the Supreme Court this morning during the hearing of a case arising out of a collision "between two motor cars. The action was an appeal against a decision by Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M., in which he "granted J. Hardinian (Mr. Terry), of Glen Eden, £40 damages in a counter-claim against J. A. Pearce (Mr. Meredith), of Auckland. Mr. Meredith stated that the two cars collided at the intersection of Dominion Road with the Mount Albert-Onehunga l?oad in October last year. Pearce brought a civil action against Hardimau claiming £90, but Hardinian counter-claimed and was successful, the claim being dismissed. It was against this decision that the appeal was made. The basis of the judgment was that a breach of the offside rule had been committed by the plaintiff Pearce, thereby causing the accident. Counsel submitted that Pearce had a perfect right to cross the road and that the accident had, been caused by the excessive speed of Hardinian when he drove across the intersection, assuming that everything had got to get out of his road. His Honor then made the comment quoted above. Mr. Meredith added that the evidence showed that Pearce was perfectly justified in crossing, and, further, that the other motorist had not observed the regulation fixing a maximum speed of 15 miles an hour when there was not a clear view of the road for a distance of 90ft. Careful Drivers' Practice. His Honor commented later that one had only to stand on an intersection to see the method adopted by two careful drivers approaching it. Each would slow up and wait for a signal from the other. Mr; Meredith: There does seem to be a misconception. Some motorists think that provided they obey the right-hand rule, they can go across an intersection at any speed, and that other traffic has got to keep out of their road. Mr. Terry, in submitting that the magistrate's decision should be upheld, said that apart from the breach of the offside rule by the appellant, Pearce, the finding was in accord with the allegation of negligence in failing to keep a proper look-out. If Hardinian was travelling at an excessive speed, as some witnesses alleged, it was impossible for the magistrate not to hold that he had been guilty of contributory,negligence. The inference to be drawn from- the fact that Pearce went on over the Intersection was that the other motorist was not travelling too fast. His Honor in giving his decision in favour of the appellant, again emphasised that the rule did not allow a motorist to barge across the road regardless of the traffic. The magistrate's judgment was reversed and the case was referred back to the Court for assessment of damages in favour of Pearce. Costs of £10 10/ were allowed.