INJURY TO MOTORIST

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18181, 31 August 1933, Page 11

INJURY TO MOTORIST

UNIDENTIFIED LORRY £IOOO INSURANCE CLAIM (rer Pres“ Association.) WELLINGTON, this day. The first action arising out of the agreement between the Minister of Transport and companies which accept risks under the Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third Party) Risks Act, 1928, is being heard in the Magistrate’s Court to-day before three arbitrators, Messrs. E. Page, S.M., W. Perry, and W. E. Leicester.

The object of the agreement was to deal with claims in respect to death or bodily injury caused by the use in New Zealand of motor vehicles that could not be identified. The agreement sets out that if any person is killed or injured by an unidentifiable motor vehicle which has the current registration plates attached, the underwriters would settle the claim in accordance with the decision of three arbitrators. The plaintiff is Neil D. liood, who is claiming £IOOO from the insurance pool, the claim being in respect to an injury on December 8, when, about three and a half miles south of Manakau, what- he described as a large heavily laden transport lorry collided with his car. Some discussion took place as to the admissibility of a statement which the claimant made to his ‘ employers four days after the accident. Counsel explained that" the circumstances of the accident were somewhat unique in that a month or so after the accident claimant lost his memory of all events over a period of eight or nine years prior to the time he came out of hospital. Mr. H. F. O’Leary, who appeared for the underwriters, said that there was some conflict of medical testimony as to the extent of the claimant’s loss of memory and for that reason counsel wished that' the claimant had completely lost his memory. He would possibly be prepared to waive the point, but as it was lie would have to take it. The court reserved 1 its decision on the question. Mr. Smyth, for olaintiff, said plaintiff claimed that the driver of the lorry was negligent in the following respects: He was on the wrong side of the road, failed to keep a proper look-out, failed to give any or adequate or sufficient notice of his approach, and failed to stop, slow down, or steer clear. (Proceeding)