Goddard Catering Group (Antigua) Ltd 1st Claimant Tonya Layne 2nd Claimant v Steve Brown Defendant [ECSC]
| Jurisdiction | Antigua and Barbuda |
| Judge | Remy J. |
| Judgment Date | 26 July 2012 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [2012] ECSC J0726-3 |
| Court | High Court (Antigua) |
| Docket Number | CLAIM NO.: ANUHCV 0166/2009 |
| Date | 26 July 2012 |
THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
CLAIM NO.: ANUHCV 0166/2009
Mrs. Fidela Corbin Lincoln for the Claimants
Mr. John Fuller for the Defendant
On the 1 st day of April 2006, a vehicular collision occurred between vehicle No. A17034 owned by the First Claimant and driven by the Second Claimant, and vehicle No. A3814 owned and driven by the Defendant. The Claimants allege that the accident was caused and/or contributed to as a result of the Defendant's negligence. They claim damages for personal injuries and consequential loss. The Defendant denies that the accident was caused as a result of his negligence. He contends that the collision was caused solely by the Second Claimant and he counterclaims for damages for personal injuries and consequential loss suffered by him as a result of the said collision.
The issues that fall for the Court's consideration are as follows:—
-
i). Who was liable for the accident which occurred on the 1 st day of April 2006? In other words, was the accident caused as a result of the negligence of the Second Claimant or of the Defendant?
-
ii). Was there contributory negligence by either of the parties, and if so, in what proportion?
-
iii). What is the amount of compensation payable to the Claimants or the Defendant?
In her Statement of Claim, the Claimant pleads that she was travelling along Cedar Grove Main Road in a westerly direction when, on approaching the intersection of Cedar Grove Main Road and Friar's Hill Main Road which was to her left, the Defendant, while travelling from south to north along Friar's Hill Main Road, drove onto Cedar Grove Main Road when it was not safe to do so. In her "Particulars of the Defendant's Negligence" she states as follows:-
"The Defendant was negligent in that he:
-
(a) Failed to keep any or any proper look out;
-
(b) Failed to see the Second Claimant in time or at all;
-
(c) Failed adequately or at all in time or at all to heed or act upon the presence, path, position and approach of motor car A17034 which was being driven by the Second Claimant
-
(d) Failed to accord precedence to the Second Claimant as she drove along the Cedar Grove Main Road;
-
(e) Emerged out of Friar's Hill Road when it was unsafe to do so by reason of the presence, path, position and approach of motor car A17034 which was being driven by the Second Claimant;
-
(f) Failed to stop and wait at the stop sign at the intersection of Friar's Hill and Cedar Grove Main Road before attempting or commencing to emerge onto the Cedar Grove Main Road;
-
(g) Failed to heed or act upon the road signs and road markings requiring the Defendant to accord precedence to the Second Claimant and other traffic travelling along the Cedar Grove Main Road;
-
(h) Drove into the path of and collided with A17034 which was being driven by the Second Claimant;
-
(i) Failed by means of his lights or horn or otherwise howsoever to warn the Claimant of his approach and/or intentions;
-
(j) Positioned himself in the far left lane while at the intersection (which lane is for vehicles intending to turn left onto the Cedar Grove Main Road), when his intention was to make a right turn;
-
(k) Failed to accord precedence to the two other vehicles which were ahead of him and which were waiting to make a right turn onto the Cedar Grove Main Road;
-
(I) Failed to apply his brakes in time or at all;
-
(m) Failed to stop, slow down, to swerve or otherwise to manage or control his vehicle as to avoid colliding with the Second Claimant, and
-
(n) Exposed the Second Claimant to foreseeable risk of injury."
The Claimant alleges that as a result of the collision, she suffered injuries and claims:-
-
i). Special damages of EC $147,953.51
-
ii). General damages;
-
iii). Interest;
-
iv). Such further and other relief as the Court deems just
-
v). Costs.
In his Defence and Counterclaim filed on the 30 th April 2009, the Defendant pleads that he was travelling from Friar's Hill Road and upon arriving at the intersection with Cedar Grove Main Road, made and completed a right turn onto the Cedar Grove Main Road. He pleads that the Second Claimant was driving along the Cedar Grove Main Road at an excessive speed of approximately 80 miles per hour and collided with the Defendant on the Defendant's designated side of the Cedar Grove Main Road. He claims that the collision was caused solely by the negligence of the Defendant, which he states in his "Particulars of the Second Claimant's Negligence" are as follows:-
-
(a) Failing to remain on her designated side of the road;
-
(b) Driving the vehicle onto the Defendant's side of the road;
-
(c) Driving too fast in all the circumstances;
-
(d) Failing to exercise due care and attention to other road users;
-
(e) Failing to stop, slow down, swerve or otherwise manoeuvre the vehicle, so as to avoid colliding with the Defenant's vehicle;
-
(f) Failing to act as a prudent driver in all the circumstances.
The Defendant pleads that as a result of the Second Claimant's negligence, he suffered pain and injury, loss and damage. He counterclaims against the Claimants:—
-
i). Special damages of EC $68,200.00
-
ii). General damages for personal injuries
-
iii). Interest
-
iv). Costs.
The evidence for the First Claimant was given by Mr. Pedro Corbin, the General Manager of the First Claimant. In his Witness Statement, Mr. Corbin stated that the Second Claimant is his niece; he states that he is aware that the vehicle was involved in a motor vehicular accident with the Defendant on the 1 st April 2006 and that the Second Claimant suffered injuries as a result and that the vehicle registration number A17034 was extensively damaged. The estimated cost of repairing the vehicle exceeded its pre-accident value and therefore could not be repaired economically. It was sold for $2,500.00.
Under cross-examination, Mr. Corbin testified that he is the General Manager of the First Defendant. He testified that the Second Defendant Ms. Layne was driving vehicle No. A17034 with his permission. She was driving a family friend home, but she was not on company business.
The Second Claimant's evidence with respect to how the accident occurred as contained in her Witness Statement is that at about 7 p.m. on the date of the accident, she was driving motor vehicle No. A17034. Her twelve (12) year old cousin Sasha Corbin was seated in the front passenger seat. She was driving in a westerly direction along Cedar Grove main road towards the junction with Longfords Road. Longfords Road is also known as Friar's Hill Road. She saw two cars waiting at the junction of Friar's Hill Road. They were at a standstill and she maintained her course since she had the right of way. She cannot remember exactly how fast she was driving, but she knew that "it was not very fast". As she approached the junction with Friar's Hill road, a third motor vehicle, a jeep, suddenly appeared from the far left lane of the junction and turned right in front of the 2 cars which had been waiting to turn, and into the path of her vehicle. She swerved right to attempt to avoid a collision but the vehicles still collided. As a result of the collision, her vehicle spun and came to a stop on the right side of Cedar Grove main road.
Under cross-examination, Ms. Layne testified that the collision occurred at the junction. She denied that she was driving fast. When it was put to her that she was driving in excess of 60 miles per hour, Ms. Layne stated that she did not agree that this was so.
The evidence of the Defendant Mr. Steve Browne is that he was driving in a northerly direction on the Friar's Hill road heading towards the Cedar Grove main road. He stated that he was driving at his regular slow speed and that a few vehicles had overtaken him earlier on that road. When he approached the intersection of Friar's Hill road and Cedar Grove main road, he put on his indicator to signal that he would be making a right turn onto the Cedar Grove main road and he veered towards and stayed closer to the center of the road to make the right turn. When he actually got to the junction, he came to a complete stop and looked both west and east along the Cedar Grove main road to see if there were any oncoming vehicles. As there was no vehicle coming and the road was clear, he proceeded to make a right turn to enter the Cedar Grove Main road. He had successfully completed the right turn and was on his side of the Cedar Grove main road travelling east when he saw the lights of a vehicle and "felt an impact almost simultaneously as he saw the lights".
Mr. Browne stated that before he made the turn, there were no other vehicles or vehicle lights or any other indication that any other vehicle was approaching in either direction. He states that the Second Claimant "just suddenly appeared" after he had completed his turn and that he only recognized her presence when he saw the lights after he was already on his side of the Cedar Grove main road. He states that the collision was so quick that he was not able to take any form of evasive measure as she came down the Cedar Grove main road. The impact from the Second Claimant colliding with his vehicle sent his vehicle spinning around and down the Cedar Grove road. His vehicle ended up facing the direction from which he was coming and he ended near the culvert to the west of the Longford's road.
Under cross-examination, Mr. Browne testified that the accident did not occur at the junction but sometime after he had left the junction. He stated that he saw the lights of the vehicle driven by Ms. Layne almost at the same time that he felt the impact. He did not see Ms. Layne approaching along the Cedar Grove Main Road.
Mr. Loic...
To continue reading
Request your trial