CLARK V. SOLOMONS AND SCOTT 11/1930

CLARK V. SOLOMONS AND SCOTT 11/1930

The conclusion of fact upon which the trial judge's decision turned, specifically the inference that Scott was misled into believing the plaintiff would not place himself in danger, was not properly supported by the evidence. The trial judge improperly relied on parts of Scott's evidence to find this inference when that evidence directly contradicted such a conclusion. Therefore, the decision could not stand and a new trial must be ordered.

Parties
Appellant: Clarke; Respondent: Solomons; Respondent: Scott
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 September 1930
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Motor Vehicle Accidents
Torts Personal Injury Negligence Contributory Negligence Motor Vehicle Accidents

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Clarke

Appellant

Solomons

Respondent

Scott

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant Scott was negligent in causing injury to the plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence
  3. 3 Whether the inference drawn by the trial judge as to the circumstances of the accident and parties' actions was proper

Ratio Decidendi

The conclusion of fact upon which the trial judge's decision turned, specifically the inference that Scott was misled into believing the plaintiff would not place himself in danger, was not properly supported by the evidence. The trial judge improperly relied on parts of Scott's evidence to find this inference when that evidence directly contradicted such a conclusion. Therefore, the decision could not stand and a new trial must be ordered.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment of the Supreme Court set aside
  • New trial ordered