Forbes v Selleys Pty Limited [2004] NSWCA 149

Forbes v Selleys Pty Limited [2004] NSWCA 149

The appeal failed because on the totality of the expert evidence, the appellant did not discharge the onus of proving, on the balance of probabilities, that exposure to MDI in SSI caused his illness; the primary judge was entitled to prefer the evidence of Dr Drew over Dr Crank regarding the inability of MDI to cause the neurological symptoms suffered absent respiratory effects, and no error of law or principle was established.

Parties
Appellant: Charles Barstow Wright Forbes; Respondent: Selleys Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 May 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Product Liability, Causation, Failure to Warn
Tort Law Consumer Law Negligence Product Liability Causation Failure to Warn

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 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Barstow Wright Forbes

Appellant

Selleys Pty Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Selleys Pty Limited was liable in negligence or under the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) for injuries allegedly caused by exposure to MDI in its product SSI.
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in finding that causation between the product and the appellant’s illness was not established on the balance of probabilities.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because on the totality of the expert evidence, the appellant did not discharge the onus of proving, on the balance of probabilities, that exposure to MDI in SSI caused his illness; the primary judge was entitled to prefer the evidence of Dr Drew over Dr Crank regarding the inability of MDI to cause the neurological symptoms suffered absent respiratory effects, and no error of law or principle was established.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.