FIRE ENGINE AND CAB.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXI, Issue 14, 1 September 1911, Page 5

FIRE ENGINE AND CAB.

RESPONSIBILITY OF FIRE BOARD. (Per Press Association.) Christchurch, August 31. Air. Justice Denniston reserved judgment in the appeal of the Christchurch Fire Board against the decision of tho Magistrate, who held that tiie Board was responsible for damages done by the brigade, whilst on the way to a fire, to a cabman whoso cab was wrecked. For tho appallant Board, it was contended that tho superintendent and In's men wore statutory officers doing a statutory duty imposed on them, not by the Board, but by the Act. Counsel also contended that it was never intended that the funds of tho Board were to he made liable in respect to accidents of this sort. AViien the Board had appointed officers and provided an efficient brigade it had no further duty. With regard to the particular duties which were imposed by the Act on the superintendent and brigade under the Act, the brigade had to proceed with all possible speed to the place ;.t which a lire occurred. It was important to note that there was no provision in tho Act, nor in the Victorian Act, on which it was based, for giving notice of action for damages, and no provision limiting the board’s liability. Such provisions were contained in the Tramway Act, the liability of the board being limited to £2OOO. His Honour remarked that it would bo extraordinary if a tramway board could kill a £IO,OOO citizen and be liable for only £2OOO. Mr. Harper replied that a similar limitation was made in the liability of the railways after the Rakaia accident. His Honour rejoined that instead of tho railways being improved, the liability of the Department was limited. For the respondeht, it was argued that the Board was liable for tho acts' of its servants. The board had a duty put on it, and was presumed to be doing the work itself. It had power to appoint and remove its officers and servants. A driver was appointed by the board, and his wages were paid by the board until ho got to the lire. He was under the control of the board. There was nothing in tho Statute to show that tho control of the. brigade was taken out of tho hands of the board until they reached the fire. Tho superintendent could not be held responsible for the negligence of his men, so that if the board were not liable tho responsibility would bo thrown back to the driver.