SEQUEL TO ACCIDENT

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXI, 6 August 1928, Page 6

SEQUEL TO ACCIDENT

DRIVER OF CAR FINED

iißDvr. Tod fast IN i- 1

i--ReserveS feas seeo. - giyettj hy Mr F. VV. -Platts, S.hJ.,, in the Hamilton Magistrate's Court in the case inwhich Cyril McLeod, factory employee, Fi - :uikto,n (Mr A, L. Tompkins) was charged with dangerous and negligent driving, says the N.Z. “Herald” correspondent.’ . The magistrate said the evidence showed that. a collision occurred on the Cambridge-Hamilton road on the night of Ist July.- Banks of fog obscured the visibility. John Muir, the driver of a hpavy t-axi, stopped ihis car on the correct side of. the road .to enable a passenger to alight. The rear , light was burning, and his front lights were on ‘[park.” Muir had been stationary ; for five or six minutes, the passenger had returned, and he. had just resumed his scat when defendant’s car crashed into the rear of Muir’s car. The latter ve-, hide was hurled along the road for a distance of 110 ft, and hurst into flames. The lights of defendant’s car, a twof&ater, were burning brightly, continued the magistrate. Defendant said he was travelling at 25 ihiles an hour. The force and ■ effect of the impact connoted er.nsidertible speed. Defendant thought that Muir’s car must have been hidden by a film of fog. It. was contended that Muir had caused an unnecessary obstruction to the road by stopping as he did, and that his action was a. breach of the motor .regulations. This was not borne out by the evidence. To constitute an offence of obstructing the highway, an unreasonable use of the road must be proved. . Muir - stopped his car. on Hjs correct side of the road in a,position, parallel,; with*,‘its direction. The road was 21ft wide'with. a .good surface, and there- was no other traffic at the time.

It was clear, that- defendant was not keeping a proper look-out, and that :in view of the presence of the fog lie was driving too fast, concluded, the; magls trate. A fine of £3 .was imposed.