Jackson, Daniel Noel v. Windahl, Neil [1980] FCA 82

Jackson, Daniel Noel v. Windahl, Neil [1980] FCA 82

The appellant was not guilty of contributory negligence as he was faced with an emergency created by the respondent's gross negligence, and the speed at which the appellant was travelling was not unreasonable in the circumstances. The general damages award was manifestly inadequate and should be increased, while the economic loss award, though modest, was not manifestly low.

Parties
Appellant: Daniel Noel Jackson; Respondent: Neil Windahl
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 June 1980
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Personal Injury, Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Damages
Tort Personal Injury Negligence Contributory Negligence Damages

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 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Noel Jackson

Appellant

Neil Windahl

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in finding the appellant guilty of contributory negligence
  2. 2 Whether the award for general damages and economic loss was manifestly inadequate

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant was not guilty of contributory negligence as he was faced with an emergency created by the respondent's gross negligence, and the speed at which the appellant was travelling was not unreasonable in the circumstances. The general damages award was manifestly inadequate and should be increased, while the economic loss award, though modest, was not manifestly low.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Finding of contributory negligence set aside
  • Damages increased by $2,000 for general damages (from $11,000 to $13,000)