WILKINSON V. MAREK

ae

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUS "ALIA

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Judgment delivered at__MELBOURNE

WILKINSON

Appeal dismissed with costs.

WILKINSON ve MAREK

DIXON C.J. KitTo J. TAYLOR J. MENZIES J.

WILKINSON v. MAREK

This appeal is brought from an order of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of New South Wales which dismissed a motion by the appellant for a new trial of an action in which the respondent claimed damages for personal injuries which were alleged to have been caused by the appellant's negligence. Upon the trial of the action the respondent had secured a verdict for £13,000 and the grounds relied upon in support of the motion were, first of all, that the verdict was against the evidence and the weight of evidence and, secondly, that the amount of damages awarded was excessive.

The respondent's injuries were caused when a motor cycle which he was riding came into collision at a point where two streets ~ Copeland and Elizabeth Streets, near Liverpool - intersected at right angles. Copeland Street runs from north to south and Elizabeth Street from east to west and the respondent was riding his bicycle in a northerly direction along the former street. Upon these matters there was common agreement between the parties but their unanimity extends no further and there were no eye-witnesses to the collision. According to the respondent he was travelling at about twenty miles an hour but as he approached the intersection he made a signal to indicate his intention of slowing down and he:says that in fact he slowed down to about five miles an hour. Then just as he came to the intersection, he observed the approach of the appellant's utility truck in his rear vision mirror and almost immediately it struck his cycle in the rear and then ran over him and his cycle.

The difference between the respondent's version