MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Southland Times, Issue 23988, 1 December 1939, Page 2

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

THURSDAY (Before Mr R. C. Abernethy, S.M.), Judgment for the plaintiff by default was given in the following civil claims: — R. Hannah and Co. Ltd v. W. Basil Printz £2/2/11, costs £l/3/6; William Todd and Co. Ltd. vi William R. Ireland (Otautau) £l/3/0, costs 8/-; William Todd and Co. Ltd. V. Thomas Guy Honywood (Lumsden) £6/3/-, costs £l/10/6; J. E. Watson and Co. Ltd. v. Frederick William Heath (Winton) £l/0/3, costs 10/-; Commissioner of Taxes v. lan Campbell Donald, £B/4/7, costs 15/-; same v. H. Cooper (Makarewa Junction) £ll/6/5, costs £l/11/-. RESERVED JUDGMENT Reserved judgment in the case in which Harry Ernest Rout (Mr B. W. Hewat) claimed from Cyril Maynard (Mr J. G. Imlay) the sum of £25 as th< cost of repairing the damage to the plaintiff’s car as the result of a collision, was given by the Magistrate. The defendant counter-claimed £5/10/- as the cost of repairing damage to his car. At 2.30 p.m. on December 4,1938, the plaintiff was driving his car in a westerly direction along Janet street, when, on the intersection with Conon street, it came into collision with a big sevenseater car driven by the defendant and travelling south on the plaintiff’s right, said the judgment. The plaintiff was negligent in failing to keep a proper look-out and in failing to give way on his right to the defendant, who, taking the intersection at a reasonable speed, was led by the plaintiff to believe that he might proceed on his Had the plaintiff continued to apply his brakes he thought there would have been no collision. The collision being due to the negligence of the plaintiff, there would therefore be judgment for the' defendant on both claim and counter-claim.' DAMAGES AWARDED Reserved judgment was given for the plaintiff for £lO5/13/- in the case in which James Kawana Heenan (Mr Eustace Russell) claimed from the Invercargill City Corporation (Mr James Robertson) damages as a result of a collision on July 17 on the InvercargillWaikiwi road between a stationary motor-car owned by the plaintiff and a tram-car. ' The plaintiff, when driving out of the entrance V the nursery of Thomas Brothers, Ltd., which was placed in a high, live hedge, stopped momentarily in the gateway, looked right and left and saw no moving traffic, stated the judgment. Two cars parked on his left between the tram rails and the near footpath somewhat obstructed his view, but, thinking that no traffic was approaching, he proceeded and negligently stopped his car with its frorit. wheels about 2ft 9in across the east rail. Leaving the engine running, he got out of his car to shut the gate and when at the rear of the car, he saw a tram approaching from his left, 84 feet away. The plaintiff rushed back to move his car, but was too late and the tram crashed into it, carrying the car forward a distance of 58 feet on to the footpath to the east of the tram-rails.

The plaintiff’s first view was inadequately taken because of the obstruction of the parked cars, and that, together with the stopping on the rails, in his opinion, constituted negligence on the part of the plaintiff. As the motorman was also negligent in failing to keep a proper look-out and failing to stop the tram, he found that the accident was due to the negligence of both pa’ ties. The negligence of the plaintiff was, however, definitely anterior to that of the defendant’s servant, who had the last opportunity of avoiding the collision. • ' ■ ; ' .' ’ REIMBURSEMENT OF MONEY Judgment for the plaintiff for the full amount claimed, £179/13/10, and costs £22/2/6, was given in the case in which the Public Mutual Insurance Company of New Zealand claimed front Robert Lockie, a farmer, of Edendale, reimbursement of money paid to Clarence Stanley Skeggs for personal injury. The original hearing was on November 14 when Mr M. M. Macdonald appeared for the plaintiff company and Mrs Gordon J. Reed for the defendant.

The ground for the claim was the failure of Lockie to notify the company that Clarence Skeggs was claiming damages. The accident out of which the claims arose occurred at the Riverton hospital comer on October 10, 1936. Lockie was driving to Invercargill when he collided with a car driven by D. G. Skeggs, who did not enter into the present claim. Clarence Skeggs was a passenger in his brother’s car and he was the third party injured. Lockie completed a claim form for the insurance company one month after the accident, not mentioning injuries to Skeggs. He mentioned that a passenger in his car had been injured, but they were not concerned with her because she was not covered by the Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third . Party Risks) Act. The insurance company repaired and paid for the damages to Lockie’s car. On December 21, 1936, Russell, Son and Meredith, on behalf of Clarence Skeggs, wrote to Lockie claiming damages for personal injury. No notice of this claim was given to the insurance company. On June 8, 1937, Russell, Son and Meredith wrote to Lockie’s solicitor (Mr Reed) giving details of a claim for £lO3/4/10 and on July 14 of the same year Mr Reed sent a letter to the insurance company advising it of the claim. This was the first notification that the company had received. The statement of claim held that the defendant did not comply with the requirements of Section II of the Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third Party Risks) Act, 1928, and did not notify the plaintiff immediately of a claim made against him because of bodily injury resulting from the accident. The plaintiff was not aware of any bodily injury resulting from the accident until August 18, 1937, and claimed to recover from the defendant the amount of £179/13/10 paid By the company to Clarence Stanley Skeggs.