HUSBAND AND WIFE CLAM £15,000

Northern Advocate, 23 March 1937, Page 6

HUSBAND AND WIFE CLAM £15,000

Record Damages Action Follows Motor Accident

[Per Press Association. Copyright.! WELLINGTON, This Day.

Arising from a motor collision near Waikanae in August last, a case was commenced in the Supreme Couit yes terday before Mr Justice Reed involving claims totalling £.15,150, the largest amount of damages for personal injuries ever claimed in New Zealand. Plaintiffs are Sarah Ann Petherick and her husband, Frederick William Petherick, a motor assessorr of Wellington, and defendants are illiam Alexander Waters, engineer, of Palmerston North and the N.I.M.U. Mutual Insurance Company, as statutory indemnifier. Because of the legal questions involved there is a probability that the case will ultimately go to the Privy Council. Mr Justice Reed presided. Mr W. E. Leicester appeared for the plaintiffs. Mr O. C. Mazengarb represented Waters in the wife’s claim, and the N. 1.M.U. the statutory indemnifier in the husband’s claim, in which Mr H. F. O’Leary, K.C., and Mr R. E. Tripe appeared for Waters.

By general agreement, the court heard together two separate actions comprising the case, one in which Mrs Petherick claimed £11,547 Is 7d from Waters, and the other in which her husband claimed £2103 12s, £IOOO and £SOO in three causes of action from Waters and the N.I.M.U. Mrs Petherick’s Claim. Mrs Petherick, in her statement of claim, said that on August 23 last year she was a passenger in her car, which was being driven by her husband on the main road near Waikanae in a northerly direction,’while Waters was driving south. Defendant, it was alleged, so negligently and unskilfully drove his car that it collided with the plaintiff’s car, the negligence consisting of driving at a dangerous and excessive speed, failing to keep an adequate look-out, failing to have his car under proper control, and failing to keep as near to the left as practicable. Mrs Petherick further alleged that, as a result of the collision, she received severe body and head injuries; that she would suffer permanent disabilities, comprising paralysis of the left arm and leg, complete blindness of the left eye, and inability to use the right eye to a greater extent than to distinguish shadows; that she would be subject to hallucinations and remain oblivious to her surroundings, with deteriorated mental condition and a generally confused state; that she would require for the rest of her life the attendance of two special nurses and constant medical attention. Her car, it was stated, was wrecked and damaged be-' yond repair. She claimed £1047 Is 7d special damages, including £540 for the car, and £10,500 general damages. Husband’s Allegations,

In hjs statement of claim, F. W. Petherick said that he had received injuries to his body and head and had suffered and would-continue to suffer considerable pain and disability as a result of the accident. He''was suffering from deafness and could not walk any distance without a stick. He was unable to concentrate to the same extent as previously, and was deprived substantially of the enjoyment of life which he would have had but for the accident. He claimed £lO7 12s special damages, and £2OOO general damages. For the second cause of action, Petherick repeated his previous allegations, and said that he would suffer heavy loss by reason of physical and financial disability, because of the condition of his, wife. He claimed for this £IOOO general damages. As a third cause of action, he claimed that he would be deprived of the society and services of his wife, for which he sought £SOO general damages. State of Defence. Waters, in his statement of defence to the first claim, admitted that his car came into- collision with the plaintiff’s cai’, and that he was responsible for the damages caused by the collision. He admitted that Mrs Petherick would be permanently disabled, but not to the extent alleged, and he put the plaintiff to proof in that respect. Pie denied that the car was damaged beyond repair. On the first cause of action in the husband’s claim, Waters admitted also that responsibility for the collision was with him, that the two plaintiffs were injured, and that Mrs Petherick was permanently injured; but he denied all the other allegations. He gave a general denial to the allegations in the second and third causes of action. An order was made by consent joining the N.I.M.U. company as a defendant in the husband’s action.