TWO CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES

Press, Volume LXXXIV, Issue 25581, 24 August 1948, Page 8

TWO CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES

TAXI COMPANY AS DEFENDANT

j UNUSUAL ISSUES PUT TO JURY A claim by Stanley Duke, a labourer, against Gold Band Taxis, Ltd., for damages for injuries received in an accident on i October 13, 1947, was heard before Mr 1 Justice Fleming and a jury in the Supreme Court yesterday. I Mr A. W. Brown appeared for Duke, and Mr C. S. Thomas, and with him Mr R. A. Young, for the defendant company. The statement of claim said that, on October 13, the plaintiff was a passenger in a taxicab, owned by the defendant company and driven by Lawrence Allen Waterreus, and that Waterreus so negligently drove the taxicab that it struck a stationary tram car, the plaintiff being severely injured. Duke claimed ~£4oo as general damages and £ll9 15s 2d as special damages. The case was described by counsel for both parties as a most unusual one, because it was admitted that the plaintiff was a passenger in the taxicab and that his injuries were due to the negligence of the driver and the amount of the damages was agreed upon. The jury, therefore, were not called on to decide these questions. They had, however, to answer the following issues:—w<as the taxicab under hire at the time of the accident? If so, where did the hiring start? If there was a hiring, -who was being carried for hire or reward? Was it within the scope of the driver’s employment to carry a passenger except for hire or reward? Was it against the orders of the defendant company for the driver to carry a passenger except for hire or reward? The plaintiff, in evidence, said he was aged 19 and was employed as a labourer by the Christchurch Municipal Electricity Department. He lived at North Beach and he knew Waterreus well. October •13 was declared a wet day and he was free from work. He went to a picture theatre for part of the day and then went to a hotel, where he had a number of drinks. About 7 p.m. he saw Waterreus in a taxi and thought he would borrow money from him and so hire a taxi to go home. He asked for the loan of ICs, but Waterreus said no, he would drive witness home, pay the fare out of his own pocket and witness could pay him later. Witness got into the front seat of the taxi and Waterreus drove off. He saw no one else in the taxi. He did not know a man Golden nor had he ever met him. The taxi went along Cashel street and Linwood avenue to Buckleys road, where it collided with i tram. Witness and Waterreus were injured and taken to hospital. He was told after the accident that a third man had been in the taxi, but he had not ;een him. .

To Mr Thomas the plaintiff said he had ■mown Waterreus at Pukaki and had borrowed money from him at other times. !Ie made no arrangements to split the fare with another man, nor did he see anyo-e else get into the taxi. He did not invite anyone else to ride in the taxi nor did he give the driver permision to invite anyone.

Driver’s Evidence Lawrence Allen Waterreus said he was employed by Gold Band Taxis, Ltd., as a driver. He had known Duke for seven or eight months and he had known Golden for some years. Golden lived at ’he same house as witness in October. 1947. About 7 p.m. on October 13 he was at the taxi stand in Cathedral square when Duke came up to the driver’s door, said he wanted to hire the. taxi to go .iome, that he had no money and would witness fix it up for him. Witness agreed to do so. Duke got into the front seat and, before leaving the Square, witness switched on the meter. Golden came up to the taxi just behind Duke and witness invited him to go for a ride. On the way to North Beach he struck a tram in Buckleys road. He did not see Golden after the accident, for Golden had just disappeared. In his first statement to the police he did not say anything about Golden being in the taxi, but he gave an explanation of this in a second statement. He thought that, because Golden disappeared from the scene of the accident, he did not want to be mixed up in any inquiry. To Mr Young Waterreus said he knew it was against the rules of the company to carry non-paying passengers. He did not go to his home in Hutchison street to pick up Golden. It was after Duke hired the taxi in Cathedral square that he invited Golden to go for the ride. That was in the Square. He did not learn until some days after the accident that Golden had made his way back to the house at 40 Hutchison street.

Norman William Golden, a labourer, was called by Mr Thomas to give evidence. Mr Thomas said this witness was the plaintiff in a second case against the defendant company. 'Golden said he rented a room in Waterreus’s house at 40 Hutchison street, Sydenham. On October 13 he had been at work ,and returned home shortly after 5 p.m. “I was out in the garden when Waterreus came to me and said he was taking a chap to New Brighton and asked me if I would like to go with him for a ride,” said witness. "I said I would go and would pay my share of the fare. Waterreus said that would be O.K. I got into the back seat of the taxi, which was at the gate. There was a chap in the front seat. Waterreus just came up with the taxi, came in and asked me if I would like to go. There was no arr ar gement made earlier in the day for Waterreus to call and pick me up. In the accident, I received serious head injuries and I know I made for home. I was not in Cathedral square that evening. It would be about 6.30 p.m. when Waterreus picked me up at the housed’ said the witness.

To Mr Brown Golden said that when he got into the taxi he did not discuss with the other man the .question of sharing the fare. The man in the taxi seemed quite agreeable about witness going, for he said nothing against it. Witness did not remember getting home after the accident. He was unconscious for more than 10 days after the accident. He did not meet the taxi in Cathedral square. It called for him at Hutchison street. Waterreus came up to him one day and asked him why he (witness) had said that Waterreus had picked him up in Hutchison street when Waterreus had said it was Cathedral square. “I replied that that was where he had picked me up.” said Golden. The jury retired at 12.50 p.m. and returned in 10 minutes. They found that the taxi-cab was under hire by Duke at the time of the accident, that the hiring started at Cathedral Square, that it was not within the scope of the driver's employment to carry a non-paying passenger, and that it was against the orders of the company for the driver to carry a non-paying passenger. His Honour reserved leave to counsel for the plaintiff to move for judgment for the amount claimed.

PLAINTIFF NON-SUITED In a second case against Gold Band Taxis, Ltd., heard before another jury, Norman William Golden, a labourer, claimed £l5OO general damages and £172 10s special damages for injuries received in the accident on October 13. The plaintiff was non-suited on the grounds that he had failed to prove he was a farepaying passenger. Mr D. J. Hewitt appeared for Golden, and Mr C. S. Thomas and Mr R. A. Young for the defendant company.