Browne v Ferguson and Baptiste

• Jurisdiction: Grenada
• Judge: St. Bernard, J.
• Judgment Date: 30 July 1971
• Neutral Citation: GD 1971 HC 23
• Court: High Court (Grenada)
• Date: 30 July 1971
• Docket Number: No. 271 of 1970

High Court

St. Bernard, J.

No. 271 of 1970

Browne

and

Ferguson and Baptiste

E.A. Heyliger instructed by Gill for plaintiff.

D. Knight for 1 ^st defendant.

A. Taylor for 2 ^nd defendant.

Damages - Personal injury — Severe left leg injury — Quantum.

St. Bernard, J.

1 This is an action for damages for negligence arising out of a motor collision on the Belmont Road on the 9th March, 1969, in which the plaintiff was seriously injured and as a result her left leg had to be amputated.

2 Both defendants deny negligence. The second defendant places the cause of the collision wholly on the negligence of the first defendant.

3 The facts as I find them are as follows:

4 The plaintiff, a married woman, 35 years old, was waiting alongside the Grand Anne road for conveyance to a funeral in St. George's, when the second defendant rode up on his motor cycle and stopped. They knew each other well and he offered to take her to town. She sat on the pillion and they set off for St. George's. On approaching the Diamond Club gap the second defendant saw the first defendant's car coming from the St. George's direction. The car was on its left side facing Grand Anne. Suddenly the car swung from its left side of the road to the right side in the path of the second defendant's vehicle., The second defendant, as soon as he saw this, tooted his horn and on seeing the first defendant's car coming towards him only a short distance away he swerved to his right side to prevent a collision and the first defendant swerved also. The first defendant stated he did not see the second defendant's vehicle until it was about 50–60 ft. away. Both vehicles were travelling, I find, at about the same speed 20 mls. per hour. The first defendant stated that the second defendant was speeding but this is not so. He first saw the other vehicle about 50ft, away and the collision took place about equal distance between them.

5 The first defendant swerved to the right side of the road as there was a ditch across the road. It was not impassable as several vehicles passed over it; others swerved as the first defendant did.

6 Leroy Daniel, a witness, whose evidence I accept, stated that the ditch took up three-quarters of the road and the first defendant went completely on his right hand and when the car reached about 12ft. from the bike a lady in the first defendant's car touched him an the shoulder and spoke. He did not know what was said, He further stated that when the second defendant saw the car coming towards him he pulled to the right of the road and the first defendant pulled to his left of the road. The witness showed where the ditch was and where the accident took place. The place of accident is only a short distance away from the ditch and I find in the agony of the moment, the second defendant could do nothing. If he turned to his left side he would have gone into or collided with Edward's shop; if he went straight ahead he is faced with a head on collision and being placed in jeopardy he did what he thought best to avoid the collision. The distance between the two vehicles when the first defendant swerved to his right could not be more than 45–50ft. and both vehicles travelling as 20 mls. per hour, there would be a head on collision as the stopping distance was too short. The first defendant stated that there were 2 dips in the road and it was not a busy traffic afternoon. The dips prevented him from seeing the on-coming vehicle. He knows the road for a long time and if he knows of this treacherous condition he must take care when travelling thereon.

7 The second defendant stated that when he saw the car swerved to his side of the road he tooted has horn but the car kept coming to him mad he could make no get away on his left side and he had to swerve to his right. I visited the locus and was shown the place of the accident and I find the accident took place not in the middle of the road as stated by the first defendant but more to left side of road.

8 I find the first defendant wholly to blame for the accident and no fault in...