NEGLIGENT DRIVING BY A SERVANT. 



325 



have maintained an action in respect of any bodily injury 

 thus sustained, notwithstanding there might have been neg- 

 ligence on the part of the defendants, an action cannot be 

 maintained under Lord Campbell's Act. But supposing 

 the circumstances of the negligence to be such that, if 

 death had not ensued, the deceased might have brought 

 his action in respect of any injury arising to him from it, 

 his representative, or a person beneficially interested in the 

 result of the action, might maintain an action in respect 

 of an injury arising from a pecuniary loss occasioned by 

 the death, although that pecuniary loss would not have 

 resulted from the accident to the deceased, if he had 

 lived (l). But in order to maintain the action the persons 

 on whose behalf it is brought must prove that during the 

 lifetime of the deceased a pecuniary advantage accrued to 

 them owing to their relationship with him. They are not 

 entitled to compensation under the statute, if the only 

 pecuniary benefit to them from his life was derived from a 

 contract which they had entered into with him (m). 



In an action for negligent driving, apian, which is to 

 be put into the hands of the witnesses, should merely show 

 the street, the pavement, the turnings, corners, &c., and 

 not the supposed position of the carriages ; for if it does, 

 the Judge will not allow it to be used (n). 



An award of compensation by a magistrate against the 

 driver of a hackney or metropolitan stage- carriage upon 

 an information for furious driving under 6 & 7 Vict. c. 86, 

 s. 28 (the London Hackney Carriages Act, 1843), is a bar 

 to a subsequent action against such driver's employers by 

 the party injured in respect of his injuries. And if the 

 party accepts such compensation he is barred from further 

 proceedings, even where he did not lay the information, or, 

 in the first instance, request the magistrate to award 

 compensation (o). 



Damage to goods and injury to the person, although they 

 have been occasioned by one and the same wrongful act. 



(l) Per Cockbura, C.J., Fi/m v. 

 Great Northtrn Sail. Co., 2 B. & 

 S. 767 ; and per Erie, C. J., S. C, 4 

 B. & S. 406. See also Franldin v. 

 South Eastern Hail. Co., 3 H. & N. 

 211 ; Dalton v. SoiUh Eastern Mail. 

 Co., 27 L. J., C. P. 227 ; and Row- 

 ley V. London and North Western 

 Rail. Co., L. B., 8 Ex. 221, Ex. Ch.; 

 42 L. J., Ex. 153; 29 L. T., N. S. 



Plan of the 

 locality. 



Conviction for 

 furious 

 driving a bar 

 to subsequent 

 action. 



180. 



(m) Sykes V. North Eastern Rail. 

 Co., 44 L. J., C. P. 191 ; 32 L. T., 

 N. S. 199 ; 23 W. E. 473. 



(n) Beamon v. Ellice, 4 C. & P. 

 586. 



(o) Wright v. London General 

 Omnibus Co., 2 Q. B. D. 271 ; 46 

 L. J., Q. B. 429 ; 36 L. T., N. S. 

 590; 25 W. E. 647. 



Separate 

 actions in 

 respect of 

 same "wrongful 

 act. 



