MAGISTRATE’S COURT

New Zealand Times, Volume XLII, Issue 9691, 20 June 1917, Page 7

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

CITY COLLISION. RESULT OF CIVIL DISPUTE. Reserved judgment was delivered by Mr W. G. Riddell. S.M., in thp Magistrate’s Court yesterday in the case of Muut, Cottrell and Co. v. the Wellington City Corporation, a claim for £129 12s 6d for dam'ages to a motor wagon and loss of profit consequent upon a collision at tho intersection of Taranaki street with Manners street on December 18th. 1916. between a tramear belonging to defendant and , plaintiff’s motor wagon. Plaintiffs claimed that the motorman was negligent in that he was driving across the intersection nt a high rate of speed and that if he had been proceeding at a moderate speed the collision would not have occurred. The magistrate said: “Tramcars are public conveyances run to a scheduled timetable and on a crossing or intersection when both vehicles are moving it is the duty of a, free vehicle under ordinary circumstances to give' Way to the public onp’’ and expressed tho opinion that the weight of evidence went to show that tlib tram' driver was travelling over tho intersection at a speed greater than a careful driver-would have used. "Upon the evidence given the ti’am driver must be held negligent/’ With respect to the driver of the motor wagon the magistrate thought that, if the driver had been keeping a proper look-put he must have seen the tramear approaching in time to stop before’he* reached the ttam line. ' ’

-Concluding, the magistrate said: ‘"I think the weight of evidence shows that plaintiff’s motor wagon would not have been damaged if it bad been stationary when the tramear reached it,' and that it was partly due to plaintiff’s driver not keeping a proper look-out and not stopping the motor wagon earlier that th© collision, .occurred. ■ In this respect I think his management of tho motor wagon was v negligent and contributed m tho collision. That being so I.find that the collision was due to tho joint and simultaneous negligence of the drivers of both vehicles and the. rule of law- in such- a case is that plaintiff cannot recover.” Judgment, was given for defendant with costs LB' fe. - At the hearing Mr TV. Ilislop appeared for the plaintiff and Mr J. O’Shea for the Cjty Corporation. POLICE GASES.

Mr L. G. Reid, S.M., dealt .with the police cases at the Magistrate-'s Court yesterday. For helpless drunkenness Denis Francis Callaghan was. fined 17s 6d, in default seven days’ gaol. Christian Carl Bay was convicted and discharged for drunkenness and fined 20s dv seven days’ imprisonment for indecency.- * * William Wilson, who had eight previous convictions .against him within the iast six months for drunkenness, was sent to Roto Eoa Island for twelve months. ■ CIVIL CASES. ■Before Mr W. G, Eiddell, S.M., judgment went for .the plaintiffs by default in the following cases: —C. M. Banks. Ltd..' v. Philip Rowling,; £1 7s 6d, costs £1 3s 6d; A. ii.'Couzeus vVGeorge Fabian, £i 4s, costs 16s; : Karori Borough Conndii v. Octavius Louis Harrison, £3 3s 6d, .costs ‘ 8s; . Duncan and Macintosh v. Donald, Henilefson. £2 13s;10d. costs 10s; W. H.‘ Nash v, Serglv-Major Taylor, 16s sd, costs Ts'; Te Aro Furnishing Co. v. Percy Butler; £3 T3s fid,- costs 11s; Kirkoaldie and Staines,-Ltd., v. 1.. J. Hayward, £6 10s 6d, costs: 23s 6d; Eliza Robertson v. John Wajnock. £6 16s 4d, costs 23s 6d ; Empire Oil Co. -v. W. E. G. Scott, <£l6 os 6d. costs £1 10s 6d; St. Patrick's College Trustees v. Marv Chapman, .£22, costs £2 lla: Eiarori Borough Council v. Frank Sutherland, £1 3s sd, costs os; James Gibson v. J. Ellison, .£1 Is, costs ss; Dalgety and Co. v. P. Spiers, .£7B 12s Id, costs £1 17s 3d. JUDGMENT SUMMONSES. In a judgment summons case E, GPadon was ordered to pay J. ■T. Brown and Son, Christchurch, the sum of £lB 11s by instalments of 10s per month.