WAIN V. CARRUTHERS

WAIN V. CARRUTHERS

Although there were prima facie arguments that the Full Court may have overstepped its appellate role, upon review of the evidence and the manner in which the case was presented to the jury, the High Court exercised its discretion to refuse leave to appeal because, even applying the correct principles, the award appeared excessive and a new trial on damages was appropriate.

Parties
Plaintiff: Carruthers; Defendant: Wain
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 May 1956
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Decision on Motion for Leave to Appeal From Full Court Order
Outcome
application for leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Assessment of Damages, Appeals, Excessive Damages, Jury Findings, Liability

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Carruthers

Plaintiff

Wain

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Decision on Motion for Leave to Appeal From Full Court Order

  1. 1 Whether the Full Court erred in interfering with the jury's award on damages as excessive
  2. 2 Whether the Full Court improperly substituted its opinion for that of the jury on questions of fact relating to damages

Ratio Decidendi

Although there were prima facie arguments that the Full Court may have overstepped its appellate role, upon review of the evidence and the manner in which the case was presented to the jury, the High Court exercised its discretion to refuse leave to appeal because, even applying the correct principles, the award appeared excessive and a new trial on damages was appropriate.

Court Disposition

application for leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • application for leave to appeal refused
  • no order as to costs of the application