DUTY OF BUS DRIVER

Grey River Argus, 20 June 1945, Page 2

DUTY OF BUS DRIVER

APPEAL AGAINST JUDGMENT FOR DAMAGES AUCKLAND, June 18, An award of £lO2 damages for injuries suffered by a passenger in a fall when a bus driver swerved to avoid a cat in January last year, was removed by Mr. Justice Cornish in a reserved judgment given on an appeal agajnst the Magistrate’s decision. The appellant was the North Shore Transport Company ( Mr. West), and the respondent Mrs. Jessie Letitia Oram (Mr. Trimmer?. Mrs. Oram had risen from her seat in the bus after pressing the buzzer and was walking toward the front to alight when the driver swerved and she fell. In the Magistrate’s opinion, the bus driver had time to . appreciate the situation, but decided to discharge his duty to the cat and his own feelings instead of to the passenger, Mrs. Oram, the judgment said. The Magistrate and the Judge differed in finding that there was an interval sufficient for choice between the seeing of the cat and the act of braking. Every passenger in a bus must be taken to know that the vehicle in which he was travelling might for some good reason be pulled up suddenly. If he Were moving while the bus was also moving, he took on himself the risk of being hurt. He had no need to rise or move until the bus became stationary. Although it might be the usual thing for passengers to get up and even move along the bus after pressing the buzzer, it did not follow that it was the safe and prudent thing to do. A negligent act did not cease to be such because it was done often by the same person or by many others. For those reasons, the driver could not be said to have acted negligently in stopping the bus as and when he did. Carriers of passengers were not insurers of the satety of the persons whom they carried. Their obligation was to exercise due care toward their passengers, and no more. The appeal was therefore allowed, with £7 7s costs and disbursements.