The Press SATURDAY, APRIL 14, 1962. Liability In Road Accidents

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29798, 14 April 1962, Page 10

The Press SATURDAY, APRIL 14, 1962. Liability In Road Accidents

The suggestion that the principle of “ absolute lia- *’ bility ” should be introduced for motor vehicle accidents, a fundamental change in the law, ought to arouse wide misgiving. It should be noted, however, that ail the AttorneyGeneral (Mr Hanan) intends at this stage is to refer the idea to a special committee of inquiry. In recommending this course, the Law Revision Committee does not necessarily support the suggestion but considers it worthy of inquiry. A similar proposal has been made before. It was rejected broadly on the grounds that it amounted to a presumption that all motorists involved in an accident were negligent, and that to accept such a presumption would substantially increase the cost of compulsory third-party insurance, even for motorists who used great skill and care. Since then the nature and volume of motor traffic has changed so greatly that a re-examination may be warranted.

Mr Hanan says there is a difficulty that in some cases negligence cannot be established so that an injured person may go without compensation. If the law were amended as suggested, however, an injured person would. presumably, be able to get compensation for an accident caused by his own negligence. We should have thought a greater weakness of the law as it stands is a tendency of juries to award damages lightly because of

their knowledge that the money is found by insurance companies and not by the nominal defendants. Indeed, it has been suggested that such cases should be taken from juries and decided by a special tribunal, a possibility the committee of inquiry should not ignore. In any event, a change in the law will not reduce litigation as much as might be thought, because the amount of damages or compensation will still be a point of argument. This is a political issue rather thaw a legal technicality. The committee's proceedings, should be in public, and its! findings should be fully dis-j cussed in Parliament before i any action is taken. Mr Hanan is also considering asking the samecommittee to consider a suggestion that the principle of absolute liability should be introduced into workers’ compensation law. Why? If compensation now payable under the act is inadequate why not amend the art? There seems no sound reason why a good and conscientious employer should be held as much liable for injury to a negligent worker as a negligent, employer for injury to a blameless worker. Both the workers’ compensation proposal and the motor vehicle proposal seem rather like extensions of social security to cover new vicissitudes of modern life—but at the expense of only a section of taxpayers. They should not be adopted unless a really compelling case can be made for them.