BRYAN v PRINCE AND ANOR [1992] NSWCA 32

BRYAN v PRINCE AND ANOR [1992] NSWCA 32

The defendant was not negligent as found by the Master; any factual errors did not warrant overturning the findings of credibility and fact. The weight of expert evidence and factual disputes did not justify appellate intervention. The Master's findings, including on the credibility of the parties, were neither in error sufficient to warrant reversal nor unsupported by the evidence.

Parties
Appellant: Bryan; Respondent: Prince; Respondent's Solicitor: Creagh and Creagh; Appellant's Solicitor: Ebsworth and Ebsworth
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 March 1992
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Decision on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Fact Finding, Weight of Expert Evidence

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bryan

Appellant

Prince

Respondent

Creagh and Creagh

Respondent's Solicitor

Ebsworth and Ebsworth

Appellant's Solicitor

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Decision on Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the defendant was negligent in connection with the motor vehicle accident
  2. 2 Whether errors in findings of fact by the Master offset his advantage of seeing witnesses
  3. 3 Weight to be given to expert evidence regarding the location of the collision and the plaintiff's body

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant was not negligent as found by the Master; any factual errors did not warrant overturning the findings of credibility and fact. The weight of expert evidence and factual disputes did not justify appellate intervention. The Master's findings, including on the credibility of the parties, were neither in error sufficient to warrant reversal nor unsupported by the evidence.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.