Freeman v Turnbull

• Jurisdiction: British Virgin Islands
• Court: High Court (British Virgin Islands)
• Judge: Hewlett, J.
• Judgment Date: 20 October 1977
• Neutral Citation: VG 1977 HC 7
• Docket Number: No. 41 of 1976
• Date: 20 October 1977

High Court

Hewlett, J

No. 41 of 1976

Freeman

and

Turnbull

Appearances:

Mr. J.S. Archibald for the plaintiff

Mr. J. Smith-Hughes for the defendant

Tort - Damages — Personal injury

Facts: Evidence revealed that the defendant negligently drove his car and injured the plaintiff.

Held: While he suffered pain he would not lose any of the amenities of life. Awarded $10,000.

Hewlett, J.

1 This is a running down action in which the plaintiff alleges that he was injured by the negligent driving of the defendant on the 26th August 1974 on the Long Bush road. The defendant on the other hand denies liability alleging that the accident was caused wholly or contributorily by the plaintiff's own negligence in running across the road and into the defendant's way.

2 The plaintiff was a passenger in a car, sitting on a seat at the back. It was lunchtime and he was returning home from school for lunch. The car in which he was travelling stopped opposite his home and he raised the back lid and jumped out. Now his home was on the opposite side of the road, and so he would have had to cross the road to get there. His evidence is that standing at the side of the car, he made to close the lid when he was knocked down by a deep driven by the defendant. He does not recollect whether he completed closing the lid or not. The driver of the car tells us that the plaintiff actually closed the lid and made a step (about 1ft.) in the direction of his house when he was knocked down. This evidence I find to be consistent with that of the police officer who went to the scene after the accident with the defendant to investigate the matter who says that the point of impact pointed out to him by the defendant was on the left hand side of the road. And the defendant's evidence too supports this because he said that the plaintiff had gone about 2 ft. from the car when he was struck, and I would say that 2 ft. is just about one step. The width of the road being about 17 ¹/₂ ft, and the width of the car which admittedly pulled to its proper side and stopped being about 4 ft, it is clear that the plaintiff could not have reached anywhere near the middle of the road. In fact the plaintiff ended up after the accident only about 3 ft. from the front end of the car, and this after the defendant's jeep had swerved to the right thereby travelling obliquely across the road to avoid colliding with the car, so it seems reasonable to conclude that the...