RTA, Welling, Telstra v Comerford [1999] NSWSC 643

RTA, Welling, Telstra v Comerford [1999] NSWSC 643

The referee was referred the question of the cause or causes of the bridge collapse, not the determination of negligence, breach of statutory duty or legal liability. On a close reading of the report, the referee considered the lay evidence, physical damage, engineering analysis and statistical assessment, and reached technical findings open on the material before him. The Roads and Traffic Authority did not establish error of principle, patent misapprehension of evidence, perversity or manifest unreasonableness. Given the technical complexity and the referee's expertise as a structural engineer, the proper exercise of discretion was to adopt the whole report.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 March 1999
Procedural Posture
Common Law Division, Construction List Proceedings Concerning Collapse of the Wellington Bridge and a Pt 72 R 2(1) Referee's Report / Notices of Motion for Adoption of Referee's Report
Outcome
Whole referee's report adopted; defendants directed to bring in short minutes; costs reserved generally on the notices of motion.
Legal Topics
["referee's Report" 'discretion to Adopt Report' 'part 72 Reference' 'bridge Collapse' 'technical Fact Finding']
['administrative Law' 'civil Procedure' 'construction Law' 'negligence'] ["referee's Report" 'discretion to Adopt Report' 'part 72 Reference' 'bridge Collapse' 'technical Fact Finding']

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

Common Law Division, Construction List Proceedings Concerning Collapse of the Wellington Bridge and a Pt 72 R 2(1) Referee's Report / Notices of Motion for Adoption of Referee's Report

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the report of Mr G C Verge dated 14 December 1998 should be adopted in whole, adopted in part, or rejected.' 'Whether the referee misconstrued or exceeded the terms of reference by not determining pleaded issues of negligence, statutory duty or liability.' 'Whether alleged inconsistencies, treatment of lay evidence, physical evidence, engineering analysis, statistical assessment and speed evidence disclosed patent misapprehension of evidence, perversity or manifest unreasonableness.']

Ratio Decidendi

The referee was referred the question of the cause or causes of the bridge collapse, not the determination of negligence, breach of statutory duty or legal liability. On a close reading of the report, the referee considered the lay evidence, physical damage, engineering analysis and statistical assessment, and reached technical findings open on the material before him. The Roads and Traffic Authority did not establish error of principle, patent misapprehension of evidence, perversity or manifest unreasonableness. Given the technical complexity and the referee's expertise as a structural engineer, the proper exercise of discretion was to adopt the whole report.

Court Disposition

Whole referee's report adopted; defendants directed to bring in short minutes; costs reserved generally on the notices of motion.

Orders

  • ['The defendants are to bring in short minutes of order to reflect the adoption of the report in whole.' 'Costs generally on the notices of motion are reserved for the time being.']