Curran v Young [1965] HCA 14

Curran v Young [1965] HCA 14

The husband’s action for loss of consortium and consequential loss caused by negligent injury to his wife is not defeated by the wife’s contributory negligence, except where the husband would be vicariously liable for the wife's negligence (e.g., if she was acting as his servant or agent). The action is separate and not derivative of the wife’s personal injury action.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['negligence' 'loss of Consortium' 'contributory Negligence']
['torts'] ['negligence' 'loss of Consortium' 'contributory Negligence']

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Is a husband's action for loss of consortium and related expenditure, arising from injuries negligently caused to his wife, defeated by the wife's contributory negligence?"]

Ratio Decidendi

The husband’s action for loss of consortium and consequential loss caused by negligent injury to his wife is not defeated by the wife’s contributory negligence, except where the husband would be vicariously liable for the wife's negligence (e.g., if she was acting as his servant or agent). The action is separate and not derivative of the wife’s personal injury action.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs.']