ECHO OF MOTOR COLLISION

Evening Star, Issue 25928, 21 October 1946, Page 2

ECHO OF MOTOR COLLISION

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES SUCCEEDS As a result of a collision.' between two motor vehicles in-Wilkie road, oir December 22 of' last; year, & claim and counter-claim for damages were heard before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M. r in the Magistrate’s Court this morning; be-' tween Victor James Crimp and Allan Charles Lex Georgeson. Mr E. J. Anderson appeared for the plaintiff, and the defendant was represented by, Mr J. G. Warrington. The plaintiff alleged in the statement of claim that,, on December 22, 1945, he was driving his car 'south-westerly along .Wilkie road, between King Edward street and Neville street, where the latter street passes under, the overhead railway bridge. At the same timd. the ' defendant, it was alleged, was driving his truck in a northerly direction along Neville street in. so . negligent a manner that/it collided with the plaintiff’s car. The alleged negligence consisted in: (1) driving at a speed which was too fast, having regard to the necessity for care in emerging from the bridge opening in the railway em-. bankment;' (2) failing to give way to traffic approaching from the right; (3) failing to keep a proper look-out; (4) failing to sound his horn or otherwise give warning of his approach; (5) failing to ascertain that the plaintiff was aware of the approach of th» defendant’s . vehicle before attempting to pass in close proximity to him; (6) failing to slow down and steerclear of the defendant. As a result of the collision the plaintiff was without the_ use of his car for a substantial period of time, and claimed damages amounting to £9O 9s 3d, made, up of £2O general damages and £75 9s 3d special damages covering the • cost of repairs { loss of use of the car. and depreciation.

Counterclaiming for £IOB 10s 8d damages, the defendant denied the allegation of negligence, and alleged that the plaintiff : (1) Drove at a speed which was too fast in the circumstances; (2) failed to keep a proper look-out; (3) failed to stop or slow down when his vision was obscured ■ by sunglare: (4) failed to keep, as close as practicable to the left of the road; (5) failed to stop or steer clear of the. defendant’s vehicle; and (6) overloaded his vehicle to such an extent that he was not in proper control of it. As a result. of the collision the. defendant was without the, use of the vehicle for a substantial period, and in addition to claiming £lO general damages he .also claimed £9B 10s Bd. special damages, covering, cost of repairs, loss of use, and depreciation. _ v Evidence was given for the plaintiff; by Constable Jack David Walker (who Sroduced a map of the locality), Cyril avies, who was a passenger in the plaintiff’s car, William Scoble Conroy (Abbotsford), and William Frederick Poole, while, in addition to the defend-ant-evidence for the defence was given by William lan McKay. . After hearing the evidence the Magistrate said that the plaintiff had five passengers in his car,- two of whom were in the front seat. . He had himself; driven over the road in question and appreciated that any driver coming from Neville street must exercise, ex- 1 treme care. .He would have little view owing to the high railway embankment and the only way to drive was with'extreme vigilance. He accepted the . evidence of the plaintiff as to .his speed in Wilkie road and it was not the case of a driver ignorant of a dangerous intersection ahead After listening to the evidence of the plaintiff as to the manner in which the accident arose the Magistrate had little doubt that the defendant did not reach the intersection at his stated speed. There was no doubt that he was not exercising, reasonable care, and certainly not the .extreme care he was required to use. In the opinion of the magistrate the plaintiff was clearly entitled to damages against the defendants Judgment would be for the full"amount with costa (£l4 12s). •! ‘ 1 ■ -