CLAIM FAILS.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVII, Issue 185, 6 August 1936, Page 5

CLAIM FAILS.

COLLISION SEQUEL.

CYCLIST AND CAR. LIGHT ON THE BICYCLE 7 An unsuccessful claim for damages arising out of a collision between a cyclist and a motor car at Point Chevalier, 011 the night of November 5, was heard at the Supreme Court yesterday before Mr. Justice Fair and a jury. The claimant was Alan George Hayes (Mr. Haigli), plasterer, who was riding a cycle at the time of the collision, and the defendant, Robert Bertram Hogan (Mr. North), factory manager. Both parties live at Point Chevalier. Plaintiff sustained a double fracture of his leg in the collision and claimed £•300 general damages and £153 special damages, which included £1 IS for loss of earnings. Mr. Haigli said it was alleged that the defendant was negligent in not giving any indication or warning of his intention to turn into Albert Road, and that had he been keeping a proper look out he must have seen the plaintiff. .The defence denied negligence, and alleged that plaintiff was riding an unlighted bicycle and that the accident was due to his negligence. The plaintiff, cross-examined, said that when he passed the Coronation Hall in Point Chevalier Road his light flickered and he put his hand in front of it to see if it was burning. Mr. North: From the hall on you don't know if it was alight or not? Witness: To the best of my knowledge it was. Constable Spellman stated that defendant had told him that there was no light on the bicycle and the plaintiff had said that it had gone out 200 yards further up the road. The defendant said the plaintiff suddently flashed into witness' headlights and that was the first he knew of him. Witness said. "You didn't have a light." Hayes said. "Xo, T didn't," adding that lie did have one, but the wind blew it out, and lie had not relighted it. Arthur Henry Hogan. a brother of tlie defendant, wjio was in the car with him, corroborated his brother's account of the accident. He said it was a very dark night. After a. retirement of four hours the jury returned a three-fourths verdict for the defendant, "For lack of evidence," the foreman said. Judgment was entered accordingly, with costs.