FOXCROFT V. DUNCAN

7103/51

4.1 Gourley, Gort, Print., Seb,

pIN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

FOXCRO, v. DUNCAN

Appeal allowed with costs. Judgment of Hanger J. discharged and in lieu thereof judgment for the defendant in the

action with costs.

FOXCROFT ve ___ DUNCAN

JUDGMENT (ORAL) DIXON C.J, EULLAGAR J.

FOXCROFT. 2» __ DUNCAN

JUDGMENT (ORAL) DIXON C.J,

FULLAGAR J. KETO J.

This is an appeal from a judgment of Hanger J. It is an action of damages for personal injuries caused by negligence and it arises out of a collision between a motor cycle and sidecar and a Customline Ford Sedan. The accident took place on llth June 1952. The date is important because it was before the Law Reform (Tort- feasors Contribution & Contributory Negligence and Division of Chattels) Act of 1952 came into force. Apparently the Act came into force on 12th January 1953.

Hanger J, found for the plaintiff, and awarded him damages. The plaintiff was the motor cyclist. He was proceeding along the street now called Coronation Drive outward bound. The defendant was driving a Customline Ford Sedan and was proceeding on his left- hand side along Coronation Drive, The collision between them took place at the entrance of Tank Street to Coronation Drive. The defendant was found guilty of negligence by Hanger J, on the ground that he did not keep a sufficient look out to enable him to see the approaching plaintiff in due time. The accident took place at 8px. at night. It was a dark drizzly evening. 'when the defendant was approaching the junction of Tank Street with Coronation Drive he appears to have been driving at a proper speed and the negligence which has been imputed to him would have been immaterial if it had not been that the plaintiff's motor cycle turned to go into Tank Street. The defendant relied upon contributory negligence in the plaintiff in making thet manoeuvre but his Honour negatived