Gardner, Brian Joseph v Duve, Caroline Francis [1978] FCA 47

Gardner, Brian Joseph v Duve, Caroline Francis [1978] FCA 47

The trial judge was entitled to accept inculpatory but reject exculpatory parts of the defendant's statement and to apportion liability at 50% to each party, given the circumstances and the evidence. However, the damages awarded were excessive when one considers appropriate compensation for past and future earnings loss and pain and suffering, and should be reduced accordingly.

Parties
Appellant (defendant): Brian Joseph Gardner; Respondent (plaintiff): Caroline Frances Duve
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 June 1978
Procedural Posture
Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory
Outcome
judgment varied
Legal Topics
Damages, Contributory Negligence, Apportionment of Liability, Assessment of Evidence
Torts Motor Vehicle Accidents Damages Contributory Negligence Apportionment of Liability Assessment of 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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian Joseph Gardner

Appellant (defendant)

Caroline Frances Duve

Respondent (plaintiff)

Procedural Posture

Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the damages award was excessive
  2. 2 Whether the apportionment of responsibility/liability between the parties was correct
  3. 3 Proper approach to use of admission and self-serving statements in evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled to accept inculpatory but reject exculpatory parts of the defendant's statement and to apportion liability at 50% to each party, given the circumstances and the evidence. However, the damages awarded were excessive when one considers appropriate compensation for past and future earnings loss and pain and suffering, and should be reduced accordingly.

Court Disposition

judgment varied

Orders

  • The amount of the judgment for the respondent given by the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory be varied by the substitution of the sum of $31,832.50 for the sum of $51,000.
  • The respondent pay the appellant's general costs of the appeal.