BOWDEN v METHAM [1992] NSWCA 28

BOWDEN v METHAM [1992] NSWCA 28

The trial judge's findings as to credibility and liability were affected by impermissible inferences drawn from the absence of certain witnesses and the defendant's lack of insurance, which constituted an error warranting appellate intervention and a retrial on all liability issues.

Parties
Appellant: Bowden; Respondent: Metham
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 March 1992
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Duty of Care, Contributory Negligence, Apportionment, Findings of Fact, Credibility of Witnesses, Appeal, Review of Trial Judgment
Tort Law Negligence Duty of Care Contributory Negligence Apportionment Findings of Fact Credibility of Witnesses Appeal +1 more

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 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bowden

Appellant

Metham

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in making findings of fact based on impermissible inferences from proved or admitted facts, particularly as to credibility of witnesses
  2. 2 Whether a new trial should be ordered on negligence, contributory negligence, and apportionment

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's findings as to credibility and liability were affected by impermissible inferences drawn from the absence of certain witnesses and the defendant's lack of insurance, which constituted an error warranting appellate intervention and a retrial on all liability issues.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Set aside the judgment in favour of the respondent/plaintiff.