Letters to the Editor
| Date | 01 January 1962 |
| Published date | 01 January 1962 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X6203500115 |
| Subject Matter | Letters to the Editor |
Letters
to
the
Editor
We publish below a letter from Mr. M. Barradell, LL.B., F.C.A., in
connexion with our
last"
Commentary". Mr. Barradell is a Special
Constable in "
X"
Division
of
the Metropolitan Police.
MOTORISTS' DILEMMA
Sir,
I hold no brief for suppression of the truth or for self-deceit:
in fact, it has long been my personal opinion that the attitude of motor
insurers has contributed very largely to the general tendency of
drivers to
blame"
the other
fool",
and that juries tend to acquit in
motoring cases more from thoughts of
"it
might have been
me"
than from any regard for the evidence. To this extent I cordially
endorse
your"
Commentary"
of Nov./Dec. 1961.
At the same time, the position of the insurance companies (with
whom I am not professionally connected) deserves a little sympathy;
and the root of potential misunderstanding lies in the distinction
between civil and criminal liability. In English law, the two concepts
are so different that a conviction, or even a plea of Guilty, in the
criminal court is not conclusive evidence of liability in a civil action
based on the same incident. The nature of the duty laid on the
individual, and the onus of proof, are two matters in which civil
and criminal procedure may diverge.
This distinction is admittedly not obvious to many folk, to whom
one law court is as
good-or
bad-as
another.
It
is however implicit
in your quotation (p. 381) from the standard form of motor insurance
policy, since for a private person to offer any " promise, payment
or
indemnity"
in criminal proceedings would be ineffectual, if not
an offence in itself.
Few readers of the
POLICE
JOURNAL
will need any reminder that
accidents are
"caused"
rather than
"happening",
or that the
accident attributable exclusively to the fault of one party alone is
far less common
than
most drivers care to admit. Further, the law
of tort (that branch of the civil law which includes damage by the
negligent use of a motor vehicle) is an exceedingly complex subject,
much of it hammered out by the Courts in the days of the pack-horse
and the carrier's cart. Against this background, unguarded remarks
January-February 1962 73
To continue reading
Request your trial