STONE V. RAMSEY

se

7/010 af 196! Ne

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Judgment delivered at——ADELAIDE on. THURSDAY, STH OCTOBER 1964

WMC Houston, Gort, Pest, Met,

we nnn ae

SUDGMENT

ca El iS el

Ve

RAMSE!

MENZIES Je

Ve

RAMSEY

Since this case began on Monday I have had a number of opportunities for reflecting upon the evidence which has been given. As I have reached my conclusions about it I do not see that any good purpose would be served by my reserving to give a considered judgment.

The plaintiff's main case, as it was opened, was that the collision between his pantechnicon and the defendant's semi-trailer transport, which took place after dark on 12th August of last year, happened solely because the defendant parked his vehicle in an unlighted or insufficiently lighted condition upon the western part of the bitumen of the road running from Crystal Brook towards Port Pirie in a northerly direction.

What I may call the primary case fails because I am satisfied that the defendant's vehicle was well lighted when it was upon the road. I find that on the trailer itself there were six lights of which there were three at the rear, the tail light and a light at the rear of each side, just at the back corners.

My principal reason for this finding is that I regard the defendant himself as an honest witness and I believe his evidence that these lights were burning when he left Crystal Brook a few minutes before the collision occurred. I should, perhaps, say that although I am prepared to find that there were lights showing ahead, in front of the prime mover, I am in some doubt whether they were head lights or parking lights. But I do not think it is very material for this purpose. The defendant's evidence which, as I said, impressed me very favourably does receive some support from other sources. First