A case of considerable interest to all users of hired motor cars commenced in H.B.M. Supreme Court on Tuesday before his Honour Judge Sir Havilland de Sausmarez, in which Geoffrey Aubie Turner and Gwendoline Turner, his wife, sued the Shanghai Garage Ca., Ld. to recover Tis, 2,500 damages and Tls 426 medical expenses, ete. for injuries received by the collision of a car, driven by the defendants' servant, and belonging to the defendants, with a tree at the side of Route Pichon. Plaintiffs in their statement of claim alleged that the defendants' servant drove the motor car recklessly and without care and though there was no traffic on the road ran into the tree. A second claim, that brought by the plaintiff's boy who was travelling in the car at the time, and who claims $500 damages and $155 for medical expenses and loss of wages, was by permission of the judge taken with the first.
Pues or Non-Responsipiity.
The defendants in their statements of defence delivered in the two actions, denied that the car was being driven recklessly or negligent-and averred that the collision referred to was due to inevitable accident without negligence on the part of the defendants or their servants. They further required the plaintiffs in both instances to furnish proof of the injuries suffered, and further said that by an xpress condition of the contract of hiring the defendants were not liable for any injury caused to the plaintiffs, whether due to the negligence of the chauffeur or otherwise, and as particulars of this defence set out the followin; "Upon the face of the defendants' printed hire chit there were printed in red the words following:—'It is distinctly understood that we take no responsibility for any injury caused to passengers through the fault of the chauffeur or otherwise.'
And by way of further answer the defendants said that the chauffeur of the car at the time of the aforesaid collision was chosen specifically and individually by the plaintiff Gwendoline Turner out of a large number of chauffeurs employed by the defendant.
Mr. K. E. Newman appeared for the plaintiffs and Mr. W. 8. Levin-son for the defence.
Mr. Newman, in his opening said that the defendants in the course of their business Ict out motor cars for hire and as such were ordinary carriers of passengers.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.