翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ Wells Township ・ Wells Township, Appanoose County, Iowa ・ Wells Township, Bradford County, Pennsylvania ・ Wells Township, Delta County, Michigan ・ Wells Township, Fulton County, Pennsylvania ・ Wells Township, Jefferson County, Ohio ・ Wells Township, Marquette County, Michigan ・ Wells Township, Marshall County, Kansas ・ Wells Township, Michigan ・ Wells Township, Pennsylvania ・ Wells Township, Rice County, Minnesota ・ Wells Township, Tuscola County, Michigan ・ Wells turbine ・ Wells v Cooper ・ Wells v SA Alumenite ・ Wells v Shield Insurance ・ Wells' Regiment of Militia ・ Wells, British Columbia ・ Wells, Fargo Detective ・ Wells, Indiana ・ Wells, Kansas ・ Wells, Maine ・ Wells, Manitowoc County, Wisconsin ・ Wells, Marshall County, West Virginia ・ Wells, Minnesota ・ Wells, Mississippi ・ Wells, Nevada ・ Wells, New Brunswick ・ Wells, New York ・ Wells, Somerset Dictionary Lists mini英和辞書 mini和英辞書 Webster 1913 Latin-English FOLDOC Wikipedia English ウィキペディア

翻訳と辞書　辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ] スポンサード リンク Wells v Shield Insurance ： ウィキペディア英語版 Wells v Shield Insurance ''Wells and Another v Shield Insurance Co Ltd and Others''〔1965 (2) SA 865 (C).〕 is an important case in the South African law of delict. It was heard in the Cape Provincial Division by Corbett J on March 15, 1965, with judgment handed down on April 7. The attorneys of the excipient (or second defendant), who was represented in court by DL Kooy, SC (with him DO Delahunt), were Reilly, Reilly & Tucker. The respondent's attorneys were Sonnenberg, Hoffman & Galombik, and he was represented by S. Aaron. The case involved an exception to a declaration, and turned on the question of the meaning and effect of section 11(1) of the Motor Vehicle Insurance Act,〔Act 29 of 1942.〕 in particular the meaning of the word "Driving" (regard being had to section 1(3). The court determined that, when the driver of a car opens its door after parking it, he has not perpetrated an act "caused by nor arising out of" the driving of the car. == Facts == After the third defendant had manoeuvred his car into a parking bay, switched off his engine and applied the hand-brake, he had reached behind him to remove an article from the back seat, and then opened the door preparatory to alighting. At this moment, a trackless tram struck the door, which protruded into its path, causing it to crash into another motorcar, and thus to injure the plaintiff and his wife. To a summons and declaration claiming damages from the insurer of the tram, the insurer of third defendant's car (the second defendant) and the third defendant, the second defendant had excepted on the ground that the plaintiffs' injuries had neither been "caused by" nor "arisen out of" the third defendant's driving of the car within the meaning of section 11 (1) of the Motor Vehicle Insurance Act. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Wells v Shield Insurance」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.