ESSELMONT V. OLDHAM AND ANOTHER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

cen ESSELMONT...

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Judgment delivered at_SYDNEY on. WEDNESDAY, 31s1

ESSELMONT ve

OLDHAM AND ANOTHER

Appeal allowed with costs. Judgment of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Western Australia E discharged and in lieu thereof order that the appeal

thereto be dismissed with costs.

po

ESSELMONT

Ve

OLDHAM AND ANOTHER

KITTo J. TAYLOR Je MENZIES Je WINDEYER J.

QWEN J.

ESSELMONT

Ve

OLDHAM AND ANOTHER

The appellant was one defendant in an action against himself and another defendant Bresland brought by the respondent Oldham for damages for negligence causing a collision between two vehicles as a result of which the respondent suffered injuries for which damages of £5,723. 1. 9 were awarded at the trial. The learned trial judge found that the accident was caused by the negligence of Bresland, who was the driver of a taxi in which Oldham was a passenger, and that the appellant, who was the driver of a motor-car, had not been negligent. Upon appeal to the Full Court that finding in favour of the present appellant was reversed and this is an appeal against the order varying the judgment of the learned trial judge by including the appellant as a party liable to pay the damages awarded. Bresland did not appeal nor was he represented upon this appeal.

The facts about which there was no dispute upon the appeal can be stated shortly. Both vehicles were travelling east in St. George's Terrace from Barrack Street, where they had been stopped by a traffic light, towards Pier Street, just beyond which there is a pedestrian crossing running north and south and about ten feet wide. St. George's Terrace is a six-lane road sixty-four feet six inches wide and both vehicles were travelling in the middle lane of the three northern traffic lanes. The appellant's car, as it was passing Pier Street, was probably about twelve feet from the northern kerb line. Bresland's taxi was a couple of lengths behind the