Ryan v Clarkin [Supreme Court.]

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date17 May 1935
Date17 May 1935
CourtSupreme Court (Irish Free State)
[S. C., I.F.S.]
Ryan
and
Clarkin (trading as The Carmel Bus Company)

Passenger in omnibus - Breaking of stub-axle - Latent flaw -"Creeping fracture" - Standard of care required of omnibus proprietors Liability for manufacturer's default - Possibility of discovering flaw.

The plaintiff was injured when a bus, in which he was a fare-paying passenger, swerved and went up on the footpath. He brought an action for negligence against the owner of the bus. The bus had been manufactured in the United States of America, and had been imported, ready for use, by the defendant. At the trial, it appeared that the accident was caused by the breaking of a stub-axle of the bus, which had been a new one fitted to the bus a few weeks previously and had been in use for that period. The mechanic who fitted it stated that he had found no flaw and evidence was given as to the daily inspection of vehicles. Expert witnesses on both sides agreed that the breaking of the stub-axle was probably due to a "creeping fracture" in the material which could not have been discovered by any ordinary inspection or examination. The expert witness for the plaintiff said it could be tested by a "loading test" which, however, he said, was not a feasible method. The expert witnesses for the defendant mentioned, two other tests, viz., "the magnetic test" and "the X-ray test." The first, however, they stated, was a test for use after the breakage in order to discover its cause, and the second was excluded as being incapable of discovering the cause in the particular case. No other test was suggested. The jury found: (1) that the driver was not negligent, but (2) that the bus was not reasonably safe for the purpose for which it was being used; and they assessed damages. Judgment was entered thereon for the plaintiff. The defendant applied to the Supreme Court to have the judgment and order set aside, and to have judgment entered for her; or, alternatively, for a new trial. Held, by the Supreme Court, that the second finding of the jury and the verdict could not be sustained, and must be set aside and judgment entered for the defendant. Per Kennedy, C.J.: The breaking of the stub-axle was caused by a defect which was not discoverable by any ordinary inspection, or even by any special examination or test, before the actual breaking took place. Therefore, whether that defect existed before the purchase of the part by the defendant or came into existence...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • McKenna v Lewis and Laoighis County Council
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 7 July 1945
    ...633. (4) [1935] 1 K. B. 558. (5) 9 B. & S. 303. (6) [1920] A. C. 956. (7) 46 I. L. T. R. 68. (8) 3 A. C. 430. (9) [1933] I. R. 210. (10) [1935] I. R. 1. (11) 1 Q. B. D. 636. (12) [1912] 2 I. R. 551. (13) [1903] 2 Ch. 638. (14) [1912] 2 Ch. 633. (15) [1906] 2 K. B. 612; [1907] 2 K. B. 637. (......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT