Combridge, A.P. v. White, R.H [1985] FCA 152

Combridge, A.P. v. White, R.H [1985] FCA 152

The trial judge's apportionment of liability, allocating 60 per cent to the defendant and 40 per cent to the plaintiff, was within the discretion afforded by law, and there were no sufficient grounds for the appellate court to interfere with the judge's discretionary decision.

Parties
Appellant: Andrew Paul Combridge; Respondent: Raymond Harold White
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 March 1985
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Contributory Negligence, Apportionment of Liability, Interference With Trial Judge's Discretion
Tort Law Contributory Negligence Apportionment of Liability Interference With Trial Judge's 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Paul Combridge

Appellant

Raymond Harold White

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in apportioning liability for contributory negligence
  2. 2 Principles governing appellate interference with apportionment of liability

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's apportionment of liability, allocating 60 per cent to the defendant and 40 per cent to the plaintiff, was within the discretion afforded by law, and there were no sufficient grounds for the appellate court to interfere with the judge's discretionary decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • That the appeal be dismissed.
  • That the appellant pay the respondent's costs.