BELL V. DEMOREST

BELL V. DEMOREST

The defendant was negligent in passing on the left of a stationary vehicle that had stopped to allow a pedestrian to pass, and there was no contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff; the damages awarded were justified and not excessive.

Parties
Appellant: Bell; Respondent: Demorest
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 July 1959
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Personal Injury, Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Assessment of Damages

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bell

Appellant

Demorest

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the defendant was negligent in passing to the left of a stationary taxi and causing injury to the plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence in crossing the road without observing the defendant's car
  3. 3 Whether the damages awarded by the trial judge were excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant was negligent in passing on the left of a stationary vehicle that had stopped to allow a pedestrian to pass, and there was no contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff; the damages awarded were justified and not excessive.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.