MOTOR COLLISION.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLII, Issue XLII, 28 April 1922, Page 5

MOTOR COLLISION.

DAMAGES AWARDED

I Judgment in a motor collision case, svhich was heard in the .New Plymouth Court some weeks ago, was delivered by Mr. A. M. Mowlem, S.M., yesterday. Snellmg and Andrews claimed damages amounting to £95 8s 6d from the Egmont County Council and Charles R. Pease, alleging that on September f 5 Pease, who was then county en-1 gineer, drove a car in such a .negligent j manner as to come in contact with. plaintiff's mail 'bus. The claim was { made up of ,two items, namely, £35 8s . 6d, cost of .repairs, and loss of earn- j ings for 27 running days £60. At the original hearing the Magistrate held that the accident had been due to the negligence of Pease, the point being reserved as to whether or not at the time of the accident Pease was acting in the capacity of his employment as engineer to the county. The question .of the amount of damages to be recovered was also reserved pending decision an the other point. The Magistrate said it had been admitted by the defendant council that on the day of the accident the defendant Pease was ( in the employment of the council, and also that the car in which he was driving when the collision took place was the property of the council, but it was contended that when the accident happened Pease was not acting in the capacity of his employment as engineer to the county. It was' admitted that the council was responsible for the upkeep of the car, and also I provided a garage for it on county property, and that Pease was in no way restricted in his use of the car, and had absolute control of it. After reviewing the evidence the Magistrate sakl he had come to the conclusion that Pease was at the time acting in the capacity of his employment, and that judgment must go against defendants. He there, fore gave judgment accordingly for the sum of £46 6s 3<3, costs £7 "lls (witnesses' expenses to be arranged between the parties and the clerk of the court). Mr. A. A. Bennett, who appeared for the county, said he would ha.ye to report the judgment, and pending the decision of the council as to whether they wished to npx)eal he asked the court to fix security for appeal, which the Magistrate did "at a sum sufficient to cover the amount of the jxidgment, plus seven guineas. Mr. T. P. Anderson represented the plaintiffs at the hearing:.