Gilbey v Murray (No 4) [2011] NSWDC 267

Gilbey v Murray (No 4) [2011] NSWDC 267

The Roads and Traffic Authority document is admissible as evidence of common driving practice relevant to the standard of care because it reflects common practice endorsed by a relevant authority; its probative value and weight is a matter for further submissions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Tort (negligence) / Evidentiary Ruling During Trial
Outcome
Document admitted into evidence
Legal Topics
['negligence' 'standard of Care' 'evidence (admissibility)']
['torts'] ['negligence' 'standard of Care' 'evidence (admissibility)']

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

Tort (negligence) / Evidentiary Ruling During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a document from the Roads and Traffic Authority on checking blind spots is admissible as evidence of standard/common practice in determining standard of care in negligence']

Ratio Decidendi

The Roads and Traffic Authority document is admissible as evidence of common driving practice relevant to the standard of care because it reflects common practice endorsed by a relevant authority; its probative value and weight is a matter for further submissions.

Court Disposition

Document admitted into evidence

Orders

  • ['The Roads and Traffic Authority document (VDB) is admitted into evidence as exhibit J']