Murray-Aynsley J:

The facts sufficiently appear from the head-note above.

In this case the Appellant was driving a motor vehicle which left the road and fell into a ravine. There were no witnesses to the accident except the Appellant himself.

In the Magistrate's Court the Police could only show that the vehicle had left the road and produced evidence of marks, and asked the Court to infer that these were made by the vehicle in question. In these circumstances can the prosecution be said to have proved that the Appellant was guilty of negligent driving? The English cases (such as Ellor v. Selfridge, 46 TLR 236) establish the proposition that where a motor vehicle leaves a road without explanation that fact is evidence of negligence, but they also indicate that where it is proved that a "skid" takes place the presumption of negligence no longer holds good (Wing v. London General Omnibus Co., 1909, 2 KB 652).

In the present case the Appellant who was the only person present at the time of the accident alleged that it was due to a skid.

The highway appears to have been of reasonable width and with a good surface.

It appears to me once there was material on which the Court