THIRD-PARTY INSURANCE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21868, 2 August 1934, Page 10

THIRD-PARTY INSURANCE

PREMIUMS NOT PAID i INFORMATIONS DISMISSED CASE OF UNLICENSED CARS 4 In a reserved judgment delivered in the Police Court yesterday, it was held by Mr. Wyvern Wilson, S.M., that a person cannot be convicted on a charge of not paying the full amount of the third-party risk insurance premium, in addition to being convicted on a charge of using a motor vehicle without renewing the licence at the end of May. In Auckland the police have prosecuted and secured convictions on both these charges since 1929. The validity of the prosecution on both charges, instead of on one relating to registration, was questioned for the first time by Mr. S. R. Mason last week, when he appeared on behalf of a motorist, George Emerson Currie. In giving judgment, Air. Wilson said the informations against defendant were those of driving a motor vehicle without a licence, driving a motor vehicle not having been licensed, and using the vehicle without having paid the full amount of the third-party risk insurance premium. The third information, to which he had pleaded not guilty, was laid under section 17 of the Motor Vehicles Insurance (ThirdParty Risks) Act, 1928. On the facts of the case defendant had failed to renew his driver's licence and the registration and insurance of his car. On the first two charges he had been convicted. Mr. Wilson considered it was clear from section 5 of the Act relating to insurance that the insurance on the vehicle was but an incident of the registration. In his opinion section 17 of the Act was not intended to impose a penalty additional to that for nonregistration. It was intended to apply where the vehicle had been relicensed and the insurance premium paid and it was being used outside of that class. The information in this case and 17 others that had been adjourned in respect to insurance was dismissed. The information was also dismissed in six new cases.

The position of those who have already been convicted on charges relating to insurance is not clear. It has been suggested that oven if the fines are recoverable and steps ar* taken to do this, the amount of work involved in the process might not justify the taking of action. It was stated that in some cases a person could recover a fine only by having it placed on the Estimates of the House of Representatives. Whether the same procedure applied to the present case it was not certain. \