AIRLINER CRASH

Evening Post, Volume CXX, Issue 144, 14 December 1935, Page 18

AIRLINER CRASH

DAMAGES FOR WIDOW

Mr. Justice Lewis, in the King's Bench Division recently, delivered his considered judgment in the test action which recalled the aeroplane disaster at Ruysselede (Belgium) on December 30, 1933, when the Imperial Airway's Cologne-to-Croydon three-engin-ed aeroplane Apollo crashed into a radio mast and ten people on board, including the pilot and second officer, were killed, says the "Manchester Guardian." Mrs. Else Charlotte Grein claimed from Imperial Airways, Limited, on behalf of herself and her daughter'Elli, damages for the less suffered by the death of her husband, Mr. Louis J. H. Grein (62), who was a passenger in the machine. An allegation of negligence was advanced and the plaintiff claimed under Lord Campbell's Act on the ground that she and her daughter were dependants of the late Mr. Grein. There was an alternative claim under "contract." The defence was a general denial of negligence and liability, with a further plea that if the company was liable the sum was limited to 125,000 francs in accordance with the "conditions of contract" on the passenger's ticket. v ; Giving judgment, Mr. Justice Lewis • said that the case as opened on behalf : of Mrs. Grein was a strong indictment of Imperial Airways. The wire- ■ less station at Ruysselede was a diffi.- ---• cult obstacle on the route from Brus- • sels to Croydon, and the pilot of the

Apollo and other pilots were "aware, of its presence. It was the onlyjobstacie of any importance on the route from Brussels to Ostend. ' •-■' . The actual height , at. which the aeroplane was flying at the! time of the accident was of no great ■• importance, the' Judge said. "If/there was! negligence it was in flying at: a height less than.the top.of the pylon. I think the machine was thoroughly and properly equipped as to engines and wireless apparatus, and I do not think Imperial Airways failed in their duties to provide a properly equipped aeroplane." , . ; : . COMPETENT, BUT NEGLIGENT. The Judge found that Mr. Gittins was a competent, fearless, and' steady pilot, but on the occasion of the illfated journey he was negligent. He failed to get a wireless message and failed to pick up a landmark but went ahead knowing of this obstruction. His prudent course was to have returned to Brussels. No one would have blamed him if he had adopted this course. Continuing, Mr. Justice Lewis said another prudent course for the pilot to have taken would have been to have turned due north or due south and to have watied until he could get communication with Haren aerodrome or had flown such a distance as he knew would.have enabled him to pass well clear of the Ruysselede wireless station, before turning to the sea. A third alternative was for him to do what the plaintiff's witnesses said he ought to- have done when he left Haren —namely, to endeavour to climb up through the ice-forming cloud, if any such existed. '■'I am as reluctant: to come to this conclusion, which necessitates a finding of negligence against a man who is not here to defend himself, as I am sure Mr. O'Connor (counsel for Mrs. Grein) was to make the attack "he did upon Gittins's capabilities as a pilot," said the Judge. • "Perhaps if Gittins or the other occupants of the aeroplane were here they might have put a different complexion, upon the facts which I have found, and, distasteful as it is to me to find that Gittins was guilty of negligence, I feel it is my duty to decide this case on the eviaence which has been given. I cannot speculate as to what, in fact, happened on the fateful journey. "I therefore find that Mr. Grein met his death owing to negligence of the defendants and that that negligence would, if death had not ensued, have entitled him to maintain an action for damages in respect thereof.. His widow has suffered damages in consequence of his death." ■Dealing with the legal argument which arose under the Carriage by Air Act, 1932, as to whether this particular journey was an "international carriage," the Judge said that in his view the Act did not apply, and one of the results of this finding was the right of the widow to proceed under Lord' Campbell's Act in respect of the death of her husband. ' "In the result," concluded Mr. Justice Lewis, "I find for the plaintiff, with costs, for the sum of £4000 — £350,0 for herself, and for the daughter the sum of £500." Judgment was entered accordingly. A stay of execution for 14 days was granted pending consideration of the question of an appeal.