MOTOR COLLISION

King Country Chronicle, Volume XXIX, Issue 4651, 31 January 1935, Page 5

MOTOR COLLISION

HEAVY DAMAGES AWARDED.

ACCIDENT ON ARATORO HILL. As a result of a motor collision 32s miles from Ai’atoro, on 28th August, Antonio Sisarich, of Te Kuiti, claimed in the Magistrate’s Court on Monday, before Mr. J.. 11. Luxford, S.M., the sum of £34 15s from A. Jarvis, carrier of Kopaki. £l6 10s was claimed for repairs to plaintiff’s van, £6 10s for fish and apples which became useless as the result of the van being put out of action, and £4 a week for the three weeks it could not run for loss of profits, and the remainder general damages. The plaintiff held that the defendant’s, lorry came round the corner on its wrong side. It cut across towards its left-hand side, the centre of the side of the lorry striking the mudguard of his van, which had by that time stopped. The van finished hard up against the left-hand bank, so that he could not open that door fully. To Mr. Low, lie said tWo boys, one on the other’s knee, sat alongside him, but he could see everything pi’operly. He said he saw a patch of mud a few yards from the corner—he may have gone out to avoid it. Jim Davidson, who was travelling in Sisarich’s van at the time of the accident, said the van had to swerve past some mud, but. the van was already coming back when the lorry was sighted and was hard into the bank at the point of impact.

J. R. Wilson testified as to the repair bill. The evidence of a freezing engineer, Mr. Campbell, who had arrived before the vehicles had been shifted, had been taken in Auckland on commission. He stated that the van was right up against the bank. Each driver blamed the other, but in his opinion the accident could not have occurred had not the lorry been on the wrong side of the road. Mr. Low. (for Jarvis) pointed out that Campbell’s evidence was based on deductions only, based on the direction in which the lorry was pointing and disregarding the effects of the impact. He submitted that both drivers were at fault. The defendant said he was travelling at 12 to 15 m.p.h. downhill in third gear with a 2-ton load. On an “S” bend, to get round the first corner he swung out to bis right, visibility being’ clear. On the lower bend he wlas swinging back and when the accilent occurred his right wheel was on the centre of the road. The plaintiff, he maintained, came up the hill at about 35 m.p.h. Witness immediately applied the brakes and stopped the lorry before the impact. Measurements taken later showed that his left-hand wheels were 18 and 15 feet from the bank. gisarich’s skidmarks went in front of the lorry and then turned in sharply untiLthe place was reached where the impact sent the van into the bank. The skidmarks were well on the outside of a mud patch which cut into the road three or four yards before the corner.

Frank Logan, a passenger in the lorry, gave evidence supporting Jarvis’s statements. Jarvis pulled up and Sisarich skidded up the hill with his brakes on and struck the lorry. Sisarich skidded from in front of the lorry to the left. Commenting that the substantial cause of the accident was Jarvis’s failure to keep to the left, Mr. Luxford gave judment for plaintiff for £25 ss, allowing only £2 10s a week for loss of profits and no general damages. The defendant was also ordered to pay costs amounting to upwards of £l2.