Bladwell v Saddler [1999] NSWCA 69

Bladwell v Saddler [1999] NSWCA 69

The appeal failed because the appellant did not show that Donovan AJ's discretion miscarried in refusing to allow Mrs Grills' late expert evidence on future care rates, given the lack of timely notice and potential prejudice to the respondent. The challenge to past care rates also failed because the record indicated that those rates were not disputed at trial and it would be wrong to allow the issue to be raised on appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 March 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal Concerning Damages in a Motor Vehicle Accident Matter / Appeal From Donovan AJ in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Common Law Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['motor Vehicle Accident Damages' 'past Domestic Care' 'future Domestic Care' 'late Expert Evidence' 'exercise of Discretion']
['torts' 'civil Procedure' 'damages'] ['motor Vehicle Accident Damages' 'past Domestic Care' 'future Domestic Care' 'late Expert Evidence' 'exercise of Discretion']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal Concerning Damages in a Motor Vehicle Accident Matter / Appeal From Donovan AJ in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Common Law Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in assessing the rate for past domestic care for the respondent plaintiff.' 'Whether the trial judge erred in assessing the rate for future domestic care for the respondent plaintiff.' "Whether the trial judge's discretion miscarried in refusing to allow Mrs Judith Grills to give evidence on the cost of future domestic care."]

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the appellant did not show that Donovan AJ's discretion miscarried in refusing to allow Mrs Grills' late expert evidence on future care rates, given the lack of timely notice and potential prejudice to the respondent. The challenge to past care rates also failed because the record indicated that those rates were not disputed at trial and it would be wrong to allow the issue to be raised on appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed with costs.']