Dickenson et Al v Attorney General

• Jurisdiction: Saint Kitts and Nevis
• Court: High Court (Saint Kitts and Nevis)
• Judge: Glasgow, J.
• Judgment Date: 13 April 1972
• Neutral Citation: KN 1972 HC 5
• Docket Number: No. 10 of 1970
• Date: 13 April 1972

High Court

Glasgow, J.

No. 10 of 1970

Dickenson et al

and

Attorney General

C.F. Henville for plaintiffs.

H.M. Squires (D.P.P.) and P. Iniss for defendant.

Tort - Negligence — Traffic accident — Liability.

Facts: Whether the accident was caused by the negligence of the defendant. The court accepted the evidence given by the plaintiff. Finding that the accident was caused solely by the negligent driving of the defendant, in that he drove too fast in the circumstances and also for driving on the wrong side of the road and failure to keep a proper lookout. Judgment given for the plaintiff.

Glasgow, J.

1 The first plaintiff's claim is for damages for injury caused to his motor vehicle P 2091 on the 1st January 1970 through the alleged negligent driving of the defendant's servant or agent of Motor vehicle P 2438 and for loss of use of the first plaintiff's said motor vehicle.

2 The second plaintiff's claim is for damages for injury caused to him by the alleged negligent driving on the 1st January 1970 by the defendant's servant or agent of motor vehicle P 2438.

3 The third plaintiff's claim is for damages for injury caused to her by the alleged negligent driving on the 1st January 1970 by the defendant's servant or agent of motor vehicle P 2438.

4 The defendant admitted that Land Rover P 2438 owned by the Government of the State of Saint Christopher Nevis Anguilla was early in the morning of 1st January being drivers from Basseterre towards Old Road in the course of his duty by Monty Walters, a member of the St. Kitts Nevis Defence Force and a servant or agent of the Government of the said State, but the defendant denied negligence on the part of the said Monty Walters and alleged negligence on the part of the second plaintiff in the driving of motor vehicle P. 2091.

5 I have given careful consideration to the evidence in this case and I am satisfied that the second plaintiff's evidence is true. I accordingly find the following facts: On the 31st December 1969 the second plaintiff borrowed the first plaintiff's Land Rover No. P. 2091. On the 1st January 1970 at about 5.10 a.m. the second plaintiff was driving Land Rover P 2091 from Half Way Tree towards Basseterre. The second plaintiff's wife was with him in the Land Rover. As Land Rover P 2091 was approaching that part of the public main road which is below Camps Siding the second plaintiff saw a vehicle approaching him from Basseterre direction. The approaching vehicle had its headlights on full beam. The second plaintiff dipped his lights. The approaching vehicle's light remained unchanged. The second plaintiff put his lights back to full beam and dipped them again. The lights of the approaching vehicle remained on full bean. The second plaintiff steered Land Rover P 2091 as close as he could to his left hand side — the mountain side- of the road, put his foot on the...