Phillip v James

• Jurisdiction: Antigua and Barbuda
• Court: High Court (Antigua)
• Judge: Louisy, J.
• Judgment Date: 07 May 1970
• Neutral Citation: AG 1970 HC 4
• Docket Number: No. 112 of 1969
• Date: 07 May 1970

High Court of Justice

Louisy, J.

No. 112 of 1969

Phillip

and

James

Appearances:

Watt for the Plaintiff

Christian for the defendant

Negligence - Damages — Traffic accident. Facts: Evidence revealed that the defendant negligently drove his car which collided into and damaged the plaintiff's car. Held: The defendant's negligence was the sole cause of the accident. Judgment for the plaintiff. Damages awarded based on the plaintiff's loss of use of his car.

Louisy, J.

1 In this action the plaintiff claim from the defendant damages for negligence. The plaintiff's case is that on the 10th October, 1968 he was driving his motor car on the factory road; as he approached the Gem Cinema, the defendant reversed, his car from a road to the south out of his yard onto the factory road and he the plaintiff collided with the defendant's car, although he moved to the right to avoid the accident. He suffered the following damages - his front bumper, left fender and left headlamp. After the accident the police came and carried out investigations. He later took the car to one Christopher Samuel, a bodyman for repairs, the plaintiff paid $350 for the repairs and in addition bought a burner and fender costing a total of $148. He claims loss of use for 90 days at $15 per day. The plaintiff states that it is not true that the defendant was driving in the road and he ran into him. The plaintiff's evidence as to how the accident happened is substantially supported by the witness Algie Jacobs. Christopher Samuel in his evidence stated that the car was brought to him for repairs by one George Mussington and he charged $550, that George Mussington is the one who made the arrangement for the repairs to the car. He was paid $200 on account. It took him 3 months to repair the car. George Mussington another witness, stated that he took the car far repairs to Samuel but did so at the instance of the plaintiff. He states that he paid for the bumper. He bought the car after it vas repaired for $2500, and paid $350 for the repairs.

2 The defendant's case is that he was driving on the factory road from west to east, he was approaching his home which is on the south side, he stopped to turn into his gap, he signalled that he was turning right, he looked, nothing was coming in front him or behind him, he was about to cross the road and he was about midway when he heard a noise on the right side of his car to the front and his car was pushed...