Shaun Derrick Spargo And Scott Summers v Edward Greatorex And Alma Greatorex Shaun Derrick Spargo And Scott Summers v Glenys Irene McDonald (As Administrator Of the Estate Of Brian Allan Boundy)

Shaun Derrick Spargo and Scott Summers (the appellants) appealed against the findings and assessments of damages in two actions brought by Edward Greatorex and Brian Allan Boundy (the respondents) against them for injuries they sustained in a collision between two motor vehicles. The respondents brought the actions for damages for the injuries and loss suffered by them as a consequence of the accident. The respondents had been passengers in a motor vehicle, driven by Mr Spargo, which had stalled at an intersection. The vehicle had been pushed by the respondents and the other occupants in an attempt to start it. The vehicle was struck from the rear by a motor vehicle driven by Mr Summers causing serious injuries to Mr Greatorex and Mr Boundy. The intersection was well lit by street lights. At the trial, both Mr Spargo and Mr Summers admitted negligence. The learned Master found both appellants guilty of negligence and that neither Mr Greatorex nor Mr Boundy was guilty of contributory negligence. The appellants appealed against the finding that there was no contributory negligence and against the assessments of damages in both actions. The appeal against the finding of no contributory negligence was dismissed. The appeal against the assessment of damages to Mr Greatorex was partly allowed. The award for gratuitous services rendered by his wife was reduced to $5,300 for the past and $1,000 for the future. The award for loss occasioned by his incapacity to employ his own labour in building the home at Hillbank was reduced to $31,602. The appeal against the assessment of damages to Mr Boundy was allowed. His death, which occurred after judgment, falsified a basic assumption of the learned Master that he would live beyond a retiring age of 65 years. The damages were reduced to $38,582.20. The parties agreed that there should be no order as to the costs of the appeal. The appeals were allowed and the judgments of the learned Master were varied in the manner described above.