Gailius Mathurin Joachim Mathurin Claimants v Andrew Paul Defendant [ECSC]
| Jurisdiction | St Lucia |
| Judge | Hariprashad-Charles J |
| Judgment Date | 13 July 2004 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [2004] ECSC J0713-4 |
| Court | High Court (Saint Lucia) |
| Docket Number | CLAIM NO. SLUHCV2002/0867 |
| Date | 13 July 2004 |
THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
(CIVIL)
CLAIM NO. SLUHCV2002/0867
Mrs. Veronica Barnard for the Claimants
Mr. Peter I. Foster with him Ms. Estelle George for the Defendant.
PERSONAL INJURIES ARISING OUT OF MOTOR VEHICULAR ACCIDENT…CLAIMANT WAS STANDING AT BACK OF VEHICLE CATCHING CRAB WHEN DEFENDANT'S VEHICLE COLLIDED WITH HIM AND HIS VEHICLE…WHO IS LIABLE…WAS THERE NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF DEFENDANT…CASE OF TART v G.W. CHITTY [1933] 2 K.B. 453 APPLIED… CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE……DAMAGES FOR PERSONAL INJURIES…CASES OF ALPHONSE v RAMNAUTH AND FENTON AUGUSTE v FRANCISNEPTUNE RELIED UPON …DAMAGES FOR PAIN & SUFFERING AND LOSS OF AMENITIES…LOSS OF FUTURE EARNINGS…NURSING CARE.
On a very dark and wet night in September 2001, a terrible accident occurred near the Praslin Bridge in the Quarter of Micoud. Gaillus Mathurin was driving his father's Toyota pickup in a westerly direction with his mother on board seated in the passenger seat in the front. Just as he passed the Praslin Beach, he stopped on the left side of the road to catch a crab. Then he drove further up and saw another crab. He stopped to catch it. As he was bending over to do so, he saw a light coming from behind him. He paid no heed to it. Suddenly, he felt an impact and knew nothing else. Mr. Andrew Paul's Toyota Jeep was in collision with him and his vehicle. He was trapped between the two vehicles and as a result, suffered serious personal injuries. He was converted from a healthy young man to a paraplegic with a sensory level at about T10/T12 and his chances of full recovery are slim.
Mr. Mathurin says that the collision was all Mr. Paul's fault and as a result, commenced these proceedings against him for damages for personal injuries. His father, Joachim Mathurin, the owner of the pickup, claimed special damages of $13,600.00 against Mr. Paul for the loss of his vehicle and loss of use for 7 days. Mr. Paul filed a defence and counterclaim on 1 st July 2003. He denied negligence, and then pleaded in the alternative, contributory negligence on the part of Mr. Mathurin. In his counterclaim, he claimed special as well as general damages. Each party relied on particulars of negligence in standard form.
There are two inconsistent accounts of the reasons for the collision. Mr. Mathurin's account is that it was a dark night and there were no street lamps in the area. He had just passed the Praslin Beach when he stopped to catch a crab. Driving a little further ahead, he saw another crab. He pulled dead left off the road and got out. All of his vehicle lights were on including the park lights, hazard lights and head lamps. He needed them on in order to catch the crab. As he was bending behind his pickup to do so, he saw a light approaching in a distance but paid no heed to it as he was concentrating on not being bitten by the crab. Then he felt an impact and lost consciousness. The following morning when he regained consciousness, he was at St. Judes Hospital.
Mr. Paul says that he was on his way to Vieux Fort from Castries where he attended meetings. He stopped off at a cousin's in La Clery before he drove to Vieux Fort. He was driving at an average speed of between 20 to 30 m.p.h. As he approached the Praslin Bridge, he did not observe anything out of the ordinary. He slowed down to about 15 to 20 m.p.h. He still did not observe anything or anyone in front of him. The next thing he knew was that someone was talking to him and he was bleeding from his forehead. He was also very dazed. Later on, he realized that he was involved in a collision.
The police were summoned to the scene and arrived shortly thereafter. P.C. 581 Ken Roberts was the investigating officer. On his arrival there, he noticed Mr. Mathurin's pickup on the left side of the road facing west with physical damage to its rear and left front. He also saw a Toyota Jeep a short distance behind the pickup with physical damage to its front. He also observed broken glass on the left side of the road facing west. There were a few spots of blood on the left side of the road on the bridge facing west. He also observed that the hazard and other lights of the pickup were on. He enquired of the drivers. Mr. Paul identified himself as the driver of the jeep. Mr. Mathurin was not present. He was taken to St. Judes Hospital. At that point, Officer Roberts marked off the position of both vehicles and made other necessary markings on the road with spray paint. Mr. Paul agreed to the markings.
Officer Roberts then proceeded to St. Judes Hospital where he saw Mr. Mathurin who was in a critical condition at the emergency room. He could not have spoken to him. He met Mary Mathurin, mother of Mr. Mathurin. She was a passenger in the pickup when the collision took place. She gave him some information.
The following morning, Officer Roberts returned to St. Judes Hospital. He spoke to Mr. Mathurin and obtained a short statement from him. Officer Roberts informed him that he may be prosecuted for the accident. Two days after, Mr. Mathurin was flown out of the State to the neighboring island of Martinique for surgery.
On Thursday, 15 th November 2001, Officer Roberts revisited the scene. Present were Mr. Paul and Mrs. Mathurin. Both parties gave brief explanation as to how the accident occurred. Mrs. Mathurin said: "on our way my son stopped to catch two crabs. He then stopped before the bridge at Praslin next to the concrete slab to catch another crab. I was seated in front on the left. I put my head outside the van and turned back to watch Gaillus. All the lights on the van were on at the time. As soon as my son rest a piece of iron on the crab, I turned my head forward and I heard a bang behind me and my van just started going forward."
Mr. Paul said: "I came from business meeting in Castries and was proceeding to Vieux Fort driving at about 30 m.p.h. At about 8.00 p.m. I got to Praslin and all I remembered is that there was an impact. I couldn't remember anything else."
Officer Roberts proceeded to take measurements in the presence of both parties which he recorded in his pocket book. Both parties agreed to the measurements but they did not agree on the point of impact. Officer Roberts continued with his investigations and subsequently charged Mr. Paul for careless driving. Officer Roberts gave a brief report on the accident. He stated:
"Motor Pickup Reg. No. FAR 692 was parked along the left side of the Praslin Highroad in a westerly direction with its hazards lights on. It has been established that Motor Jeep Reg. No. PC1045 driven by Andrew Paul was traveling along the said road in a westerly direction, collided into the rear of the said motor pickup and also pedestrian Gaillus Mathurin, who was standing on the left side of FAR 692."
Officer Roberts opined that from his investigations, Mr. Mathurin's vehicle could have been seen from a distance of over 200 feet away.
Several other witnesses testified at the trial. Of some significance is the testimony of Mr. Michael Doussa, a mini bus driver who claimed that he was the first person to arrive at the scene of the accident. He did not know either of the drivers. He alleged that he was driving his mini bus from Castries to Vieux Fort on the said night. When he approached the Praslin Bridge, he noticed some lights ahead. As he got closer, he realized that there was an accident. He got out of his vehicle and went to the scene. He went to the Jeep and found Mr. Paul in the driver's seat. He spoke to him and saw his head bleeding.
Mr. Doussa then looked around and saw a pickup up against the left side of the Praslin Bridge. He saw "someone lying on the bridge under the pickup with his legs hanging over the bridge and over the river below." There were 2 passengers in his van and he asked them to call the police. He alleged that at the time of the accident, the side of the road leading up to the bridge was covered with very tall elephant grass, at least 6 feet high right up to the road. He observed also, that the lights on Mr. Paul's vehicle were still on and the lights on Mr. Mathurin's vehicle were off.
I pause to observe that this bit of evidence is in direct contradiction with the evidence given by Officer Roberts who testified that when he got to the scene of the accident, "the lights and hazards of the pickup were on."
Mrs. Mathurin was also a crucial witness because she was present at the time of the accident. She stressed that the lights were on when Mr. Paul collided with their vehicle. She also stated that after the accident, she felt dazed. She wanted to get out of the pickup but she could not as the passenger door was smashed. As she attempted to exit the vehicle, an unknown gentleman assisted her in doing so. She then saw her son lying on his back on the left side of the road on the grass verge. She started crying and called for help. She ran to Praslin to look for help and did not return to the scene of the accident.
Even though there were many witnesses in this case, the evidence, in my view, turned on the accounts given by the two drivers as to how the accident occurred. The testimony given by Mr. Paul in particular was not very helpful as he could not recall what occurred prior to the accident.
The Court visited the locus and got a better perspective of how and where the accident occurred. At the end of the day, I believed Officer Roberts' evidence that the lights on the pickup were on when he arrived at the scene but I did not believe that the hazard lights were on. I believed that in his eagerness to catch another crab, Mr. Mathurin hurriedly stopped his vehicle and did not concentrate on lights. Whatever lights were on at the time remained...
To continue reading
Request your trial