Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Lord President—I am bound to say that I never read a description of an accident which left me in less doubt as to how it happened and who was to blame. The pursuer's car was coming from Edinburgh and going in the direction of Queensferry. I think it is quite clearly proved that not only was he at the proper side of the road, but that he was well on his proper side of the road, indeed within about 9 feet, I think, of the ditch at the extreme left side. It is proved, and not contradicted, that, as he approached the crossing, which is opposite Davidson's Mains he sounded his horn—that is to say, that he gave notice to all concerned that there was a car approaching the crossing. I do not think that it is proved that he was going at an excessive speed. I am not for one instant disagreeing with the remark of the Sheriff, who says that he thinks it is the duty of people, even upon the main road, to approach crossings which go over the main road at anon-excessive speed. When I say “non-excessive” I am not really thinking of the legal limit of twenty miles an hour, which does not seem to me to have much bearing upon this class of question. The truth is that a safe speed to approach a crossing should be, and in many instances is, a great deal less than twenty miles an hour. You cannot lay down a regular rule about it, because there are crossings and crossings, and crossings so far as their dangerous elements are concerned depend upon various things. The angle of a crossing is one of these things, the breadth of the road which makes the crossing is another thing, and last but not least is the state of the hedges, or it may be the buildings which form the angle of the crossing. Take an extreme case where the angle of a crossing is formed by a building, and the crossing is at a re-entrant angle from the place from which you are coming, it is quite evident that you can see nothing of the crossing until you are on the crossing itself. One knows many crossings where from a practical point of view a speed of more than about two or three miles an hour is unsafe. If I should wish to give an instance I should give the road which comes from Longniddry Station and goes into Gosford—I mean the road going along the shore past Gosford. That is a place where anyone would be doing perfectly wrongly if he arrived at a speed of more than two or three miles an hour at the utmost. On the other hand, there are other places where the roads are wide and nothing to obscure the view where a much greater speed would be perfectly safe. Accordingly I do not think anyone can lay down general rules as to particular speed, but one can say that it is certainly the business of persons driving on the main road to approach a crossing on the main road with caution and without excessive speed, I do not think it has been shown affirmatively that, looking to the conditions of this crossing, which is not a bad crossing, and where there are no obstructions, that the pursuer's car did approach it at an excessive speed. It may be difficult—I think it is impossible—to say the precise pace at which the car was going, but I see nothing to suppose that it was going at such a speed that would make manœuvres for those who drove it unusually difficult.

The other car was coming from the direction of Davidson's Mains, and had as its intention to cross over into the Craigcrook Road. In doing so the driver knew that he was going to cross at right angles to a very frequented and main thoroughfare, and if there is one rule more than another that it is necessary to lay down for the practical conduct of traffic it is that it is the business of those who are on the side road and going to cross the main road to look out when they enter the main road and to give way to all traffic which is coming along the main road. Of course there is a degree in everything. They have a right to cross the main road, and it does not mean that they are never to get across the main road until nobody else is in sight, but it does mean that where there is any possibility at all of collision it is the business of the person on the side road to give way to the person on the main road; and as the corollary to that, it means that you ought to approach into a main road from a side road at such a pace as to have your car entirely under control so as to be prepared for whatever you find is the state of affairs upon the main road.

The first fault which the car from Davidson's Mains seems to me to have made is that I think he came up without that attitude of expectiveness on to the main road. He seems to have made up his mind to cross at once, and then only at a somewhat late time to have become aware of the other car. But his fault did not stop there. When he saw the car he seemingly made a miscalculation and thought he could still get over; but when he was just at the edge of the main road he saw that he had made a miscalculation and changed his mind and applied his brakes. I say nothing against his applying his brakes, but why didn't he turn to the left. The thing is so simple to anyone who looks at the angles and knows anything about the behaviour of a motor car, that the only way you can account for the accident at all is to suppose, as one must that the man lost his head for the moment, because the diagram put in by the defender himself is absolutely conclusive of the case. He went straight on his track and he never turned to the left at all. And turning to the left was really not worthy being called a manœuvre. It was a simple turning to where there was any amount of free road, and the slower he was going the easier it was for him to turn. If his own evidence is correct, that at the moment of collision his car was either at a standstill or so nearly at a standstill that it would have run perhaps only a yard farther, that made it all the easier for him to have turned it at even the last moment, and avoided the other car. And I venture to say that the doctrine which has often and often been

Page: 113↓