The injuries received by the plaintiff included a fracture of the femur of the left leg, not the neck of the femur but in the middle third of the shaft, bruising of the back above the left hip bone and of the left shoulder and abrasions and lacerations of the left forehead and face. The right shin was also bruised, but it will be seen that it was on the left side that the plaintiff was chiefly injured. His dentures were found upon the road, broken. The medical evidence was that he would have been unlikely to sustain these injuries had he merely fallen upon the roadway through losing consciousness and that if he had fallen for that reason and then been run over by a passing car while prostrate he would probably have sustained injuries of a different character. In particular it was unlikely that merely falling would break the shaft of the femur and if he had been run over while on the ground soft tissues could hardly have escaped serious and extensive damage. The plaintiff was wearing a leather overcoat, a leather skull cap and high gum boots over his ordinary clothing, a fact of course relevant both to his visibility and to the kind of injury he might be expected to suffer through falling. The truck driver who found him said that it was a very dark wintry evening and there had been falling rain; the road was very dark. He recollected no artificial light at that part of the road. His headlights were, of course, burning. The plaintiff in his evidence described it as a very cold wet night with driving rain, driving into his face from the south, that is, from the direction in which he was travelling. An important matter, no doubt, is the cause of the plaintiff's feeling ill or unwell so that he decided to desert his bicycle and proceed on foot hoping to obtain a lift. He said in evidence that he felt sick in the stomach and his hands were numb from the driving rain and the cold. In a statement to the police he had said that some years ago he developed a cerebral tumour, approximately ten years ago. He said that two years later he had received surgical treatment for the complaint. He had had several blackouts during that period and since the operation upon him he had had several, the last one, of only a short duration, a few months before the accident. In evidence he placed the time when he entered hospital as some five years ago and he said that it was for examination not treatment. He had understood it was a cerebral tumour, but that proved to be a misapprehension. But, whatever it was, it did produce blackouts, though he had not for a number of years had serious blackouts in which he lost consciousness. Then twelve months ago he had a very minor one after fighting bush fires, but it lasted only a couple of minutes. When they were about to come on he had felt ill beforehand; he had felt dizziness and loss of power in the tongue and hands. A constable of police who had interviewed the plaintiff gave evidence that in answer to a question whether he had been struck by a motor vehicle the plaintiff had replied that no motor vehicle was involved; that he had had a blackout. The plaintiff said that he could not recall saying this; the constable saw him in hospital on the night of the accident and he was dazed. The medical evidence was that as to the events occurring within the two minutes or so immediately preceeding the infliction upon the plaintiff of his injuries he might well have no memory of them. Concussion might have caused retrograde amnesia.