Howlett v Campion & Anor. [2000] NSWCA 22

Howlett v Campion & Anor. [2000] NSWCA 22

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge's apportionment of 20% contributory negligence was not shown to be erroneous, there was no evidentiary basis to attribute causation to road design, and the assessment of damages was within permissible bounds given the state of the evidence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 February 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision Following Trial in Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['negligence' 'contributory Negligence' 'damages' 'causation']

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 / Court of Appeal Decision Following Trial in Supreme Court

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in finding contributory negligence and apportioning fault at 20% to the plaintiff' 'Whether the trial judge erred in finding no causative link between road design and the accident' "Whether the trial judge's assessment of damages for non-economic and economic loss was manifestly inadequate"]

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge's apportionment of 20% contributory negligence was not shown to be erroneous, there was no evidentiary basis to attribute causation to road design, and the assessment of damages was within permissible bounds given the state of the evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed.' 'Cross-appeal dismissed.' "The appellant is to pay the first respondent's and the second respondent's costs of the appeal." "The cross-appellant is to pay the first and second cross-respondent's costs of the cross-appeal."]