JURY FAILS TO AGREE

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 36, 12 February 1931, Page 22

JURY FAILS TO AGREE

ORDER FOR NEW TRIAL

CLAIM AGAINST BUS COMPANY

After having been out a little over foiir and a half hours, tlie jury was unable 1o agree in the case in which Christopher O'Shca, carpenter, of Kaiwarra, and his wife, Annie Jane O'Shea, claimed £1230 damages from the Kol-burn-Karori Bus Co., Ltd., as a result of the death,of their son, Jack O'Siiea, and as'there' was no possibility of a three-fourths majority, his Ilonuur.the Chief Justice, Sir Michael Myers, granted an order for a new trial to take place at. (he next sessions of the Suprcine Court. On the night of 9th August last there was a collision between the deceased's motor-cycle and a motor-bus driven by Thomas Goodall at the intersection of Old Earoa road and the Northland tunnel road. It was.alleged by the plaintiffs that the collision was due to the negligence of the bus driver, but that was denied by the defendant company vylio, for a further defence, alleged that the accident was caused by the negligence of the deceased.' The jury was asked to consider the. following issues:—(1) Was the defendant Thomas Goodall guilty of negligence in all or any, and, if any, which of the following respects: (a) Driving at an excessive or improper speed? (b) Failing to keep a proper look-out? (c) Not observing the "off-side" rule? (d) Failing to stop in sufficient time to avoid a collision? ' (o) Not' exercising sufficient or proper control over the motor-bus at the time of the collision? (2) Was the deceased Jack O'Shea guilty of negligence in all or any, and, if any, which of the following respects: (a) Driving at an excessive or improper speed? (b).Not keeping a proper lookout? (c) Not giving any or a sufficient warning of his approach? (d) Not having his motor-cycle sufficiently lighted to indicate his x approach? " (c) Failing to stop in sufficient time to avoid the collision? (f) Not exercising sufficient or proper control over the motor-cycle immediately before the time of the collision? (3) If both,were negligent, could the defendant Goodallj after.the ■ negligence of both parties had commenced, have avoided the collision by; the exercise of, of ordinary and reasonable,care? (4) If both were negligent, could the deceased, after the negligence of both parties had commenced, have avoided, the collision" by- the exercise of ordinary, and reasonalbe care? . (5) Damages (if any):- (a) To the plaintiff Christopher-O'Shea. (b) To thei.'plaintiff-"-Ahnip :Jane O'Shea. ' The jury retired at>s;ls'';>p:in. and returned at 9.50 p.m. with the announcement that it had booii; unable to agree and that there was, no possibility of a three-fourths majority. The jury was discharged. ■ , , . . : Mr. P. S. K. Macassey appeared for the plaintiffs, and.Mr. T. C. A. Hislop for the defendant. ■