CONVEYANCE OF UNEMPLOYED

Mt Benger Mail, 26 April 1933, Page 2

CONVEYANCE OF UNEMPLOYED

INTERESTING COURT DECISION. Breach Motor Vehicles Act. At the S.M. Court, Luwmtee, on Monday, James M. Paul was charged with on the Kith February, at Wailuhumi, using a motor car for Iho purpose of carrying by contract passengers without first paying the full amount of insurance urunium payable in respect thereof. Air K. C. Moore appeared for the defendant who pleaded not guilty, and the prosecution was conducted by Coast able Ross of Waituhuua. In stating the circumstances under whitdi die charge was laid Constable h’os.s said it was laid under section 17 m ‘‘The Motor Vehicles Act.’’ His Worship pointed out that under | this section no penalty was provided. Constable Ross in reply said that he had been instructed by the head of the Pi lice Department in Dunedin to pro sc cute under this section. Continuing, he said the defendant, who was a county surfaceman, owned a live sealer i :.r which lie had registered as for pri v; ,te um-. Pur some considerable time iu Ufi.tl been conveying daily from five to six unemployed to various part* of the Waitahuna Riding to work ami bringing them back to Waitahuna in the evening, and lor this work he was ia reiving payment for the use of has ear at the rate of iki per mile, it was hi id that this was a breach of the Act in that the requisite premium had not bi eu paid to the insurance to, interested. to cover the third party risk. Ami ten MolTalt, postmaster and dtps tv registrar m motor vehicles, Was minima, deposed t hut the defendant had rgislered his ear in June. in class I, whereas if it had been known ihiit he was going to earn passengers ii should have been registered under Class 9a. the premium for winch would have been i’J, ami if used lor carrying passengers to and fnun tie- district the r. eisl ration slmubi have beea in t ’hiss S. the fee .11 this ease 'icing i 7 Pis. Prank I). Grant. I'uapeka County eng neer, deposed that the defendant was si county employee and that in the course of his duties was ca led upon to convev workmen to various parts, re ei iving an aiiowatice fm the use ui hj s ear. He had the a.-suraneo of the State Insurance Department that the Count V‘s uecide-jit po.ley covered t lie 1,1, .; eonv . yed. At the end of each month the defendant put in a schedule ~£ ;he vtra mileage and reet ived pay T- Mr Mo me; It d- f. ndaut 'rav eiied on liis own to any particular work he Would get mileage on this particular day il was f-T approved county work that the men wete e.nveycd. There was no suggestion that he received any lay meat <iireet f;o:a th mem Other ,at own.is in the county were in the same p >sP ion and he und- rsto-d it wa-.-eaeia practice ,n other enmt.es. b, Const able Ross; He eou'd not say win ther th. .‘south Ibil.sh Instuanee Co. had agreed to tins ear being us- d for th. eua\ a nee of workmen. To the i 'ourt: i‘he defendant after cany ng the men out ae ! > as toieiuaa and sees that the work is Ic ing carried eUt. < .U i‘.e Ross. slat.oned a! Wa.ta hut;a. depos.-d that iu S-ptmber last hj, interviewed tin defendant in re g.aid to his carrying um-tcj-ley ed iu the Waitahuna Ri-ling and h's tee- iving n aiUioTatiou at tin- rate of -M pr mile. He said he did mq aetnaby re •, use a mileage that 1! was mem ly ex Ira pav, lie ivD'ired the cireuaislati res to the Superiiiti nde'it and was in sin.eted t.. warn the defendaiit to Cetise using his ear lor ties purpose unless it was regiM.-iod in its proper class. Ou ;he l‘"h February to- .-.gain interviewed ib feedant who lefus.d to un.-wei any ■ pi. stioiis. and a. 1 vised w.tne-s to carry on. On the following day ie slopped him on tin road and asked hj m for his motor ear iicenet whieti L• - j.rodueed thai n gilt. it was for driving ii pri Mite car only. Since the t-’Mli March hi had k.pt defendant und'-r observation and found that lie was carrying daiiv from live to six passengers in h ;s cur. In replv to Mr Moore, witness ud mtiid having asked defendant tor hiru i\ ik'G Icrrt 1 lie tit ** but ;l wus not forth eniidng. Defendant had not So hm know .edge carried, otliei than unem _\i, Mnure in addressing til-' court '*n In \ n!f of tie defendant said the aettiH ,b f.-jidaut in the ease should hav .• been Tie Tnapeka Uounly t'oiineil f-r tiesi: rfneemen in the various ri-lings wre working under an arrangement to carry unemployed men to and from the site of their work, and. the result of the ’action was of extreme imj-ortaiu-e to the eoun'v. lie coal, tided the receipt ~f i',d per mile for the usi o! his car did no eon-til ute the carrying ol pas s. i.gel- within the meaning of the Act. The Smith British Insurance Co had no 1 espi.nsibililv in regard to these men who had no oilier means of reaching their work. The defendant got no bentlit iu respect of the number carried. j'oply to the ibuieh Mr Grant, who whs recalled, said the defendant did mu receive remuneration for Ids ear when used only for his own conveyance *0 wotk but was paid in eases where he wus asked to carry out urgent work and had to u.-e his car to gel to it. His Worship then retired to consider hi,- decision and on returning he said hi was satisfied that the ear should have been registered as a contract car. Di fernbint would be convicted without tine.