Supreme Court
Action No. 97 of 1979
19th August, 1980.
Staine, J.

Mr. Philip Zuniga for the Plaintiff.

Road traffic accident - Accident involving second-hand vehicle- Depreciation of value of motor vehicle to be taken into account in assessing damages - Failure by plaintiff to particularise injuries suffered and expenses incurred in treating injuries -Need for court to be satisfied as to correctness of liquidated damages - Approach of Court where liquidated damages are not particularised.

J U D G M E N T

This Action was commenced by a Writ of Summons filed on the 19th May, 1979. The Defendant was given 15 days within which to enter appearance, that is, 15 days after the Writ was served upon him.

The matter having come before the Court in Chambers for directions as to the mode of assessment of damages, the Court ordered that evidence as to damages should be given on Affidavit, but that the Despondent should attend Court should the Court require to examine the Despondent.

Briefly the claim is for damages arising out of a collision between the Plaintiff's pickup, driven by the Plaintiff, and Defendant's Ford Galaxie Motor Car, driven by the Defendant. This accident is alleged to have occurred on the 4th of September, 1978. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant drove negligently, and as a result of this negligence, the Plaintiff sustained personal injuries and loss.

The matter first came before the Court on the 24th June, 1980, and at that time the Court gave the directions to which reference has already been made, and on the date set for hearing of the application, the Plaintiff filed an Affidavit, of which he was the Deponent.

The Plaintiff, in his Affidavit, after reciting the facts of the incident of the collision, and alleging that the Defendant was negligent, alleged that his motor vehicle was so damaged, it could not move. I assume he means the vehicle could not move on its own. I assume this because he continues that the motor vehicle had to be towed away by his mechanic, who towed it to Corozal. The mechanic found the vehicle to be damaged beyond repair, and the Defendant deposed, it was sold as scrap for the sum of $1,000.00. The vehicle was bought in September 1977 for $4,700.00. This purchase price suggests that when the vehicle was first bought by the Plaintiff, it was a vehicle already in use, as otherwise that would be a ridiculously low figure for a new vehicle of that type. If the vehicle was, as I think, a used vehicle then it would undergo depreciation at a more rapid rate than if it were new. I would place the life span of a used motor vehicle at no more than 5 years, so that the Plaintiff's claim in respect of his damaged motor vehicle falls to be reduced, to the extent that it had depreciated over one year.

The Plaintiff has alleged, as well, that he suffered personal injuries to his ribs and chest. He has not stated the nature of these injuries, and this failure leaves the Court to look at all the evidence presented, before accepting that the claim in respect of personal injuries can be justified.

After the accident, which, the Plaintiff deposed, occurred at a point between Miles 24 and 25 on the Northern Road leading to Corozal Town, he, the Plaintiff, went to the Police Training School at Ladyville (some 14 miles away), and telephoned his mechanic, Samuel Hall. Mr. Hall towed the vehicle to Corozal.

The Plaintiff avers that as a result of the accident, he suffered injuries to his ribs and chest, for which he received medical treatment, at the cost of $200.00. Apart from saying that he suffered injuries to his chest and ribs, the Plaintiff has failed to give any details of the exact nature of his injuries or the extent thereof, nor has he submitted any certificate, signed by a duly qualified medical practitioner.

I would observe that the Plaintiff was, at the time of the accident, an Assistant Inspector of Police serving in the Belize Police Force, and, as such, was entitled to free medical treatment from a Government medical practitioner. If he failed to take advantage of such facilities, he can not be heard to complain. In any case the injuries suffered by the Plaintiff could not be considerable, since after the accident, he travelled back to Ladyville, before going to seek medical treatment.

It may be that the sum of $200.00 claimed by the Plaintiff, was for medication, and viewing the matter in that light, I would allow the sum of $200.00 as special damages under this heading.

But I can not allow any sum by way of general damages. The reason for this is simply that the Plaintiff has failed to supply the Court with the necessary evidence, and the Court can not act in a vacuum. If this case had gone for trial, such evidence would have been necessary and the fact that judgment had been entered in default of pleadings, makes no difference to this requirement.

Similar comments would appear to be applicable to claims by the Plaintiff in respect to injuries allegedly suffered by his wife, that is, a fracture of the left knee, as well as injuries to the children. No report of any medical practitioner has been submitted, and no receipts in respect of the several sums claimed to have been expended, were presented to the Court.

In the circumstances, it appears that the Court has two options to exercise, or, rather a duty and an option to exercise.

In respect of the sums claimed to have been expended, no receipts have been presented, and therefore the rule that the Court must be satisfied in respect to a liquidated claim, had not been satisfied. Nor can the Court adequately compensate for any personal injuries suffered, when no enabling evidence has been supplied.

The claim in respect of the wife's injuries will be allowed to stand at $250.00 as well as the claim of $200.00 in respect of the hire of domestic help while the wife was disabled.

But on the face of it $500.00 in respect of dental care of a child appears excessive, and is reduced to a more reasonable and acceptable figure of $250.00. Likewise the sum of $200.00 claimed in respect of the hospitalization of the child Nalinie for one day is gross and excessive and will be reduce to $75.00, to cover both hospitalization and medication.

To summarize, in disposing of this claim the Court makes the following award in respect of special damages:

In addition the Plaintiff is to have his costs taxed at $200.00, making a total of $3,975.00 as the sum the Court awards.

----------OO----------