DURWARD V. CRACK & ANOR.

DURWARD V. CRACK & ANOR.

The finding of contributory negligence against the plaintiff was erroneous; the plaintiff acting on the hand signal in the manner he did did not constitute contributory negligence. The damages assessed by the trial judge were insufficient for the injuries sustained.

Parties
Plaintiff: Durward; Defendant: Crack & Anor.
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 August 1955
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Personal Injuries, 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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Durward

Plaintiff

Crack & Anor.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the finding of contributory negligence is to be supported
  2. 2 Whether the amount of damages contingently assessed is sufficient

Ratio Decidendi

The finding of contributory negligence against the plaintiff was erroneous; the plaintiff acting on the hand signal in the manner he did did not constitute contributory negligence. The damages assessed by the trial judge were insufficient for the injuries sustained.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment of the Supreme Court discharged
  • Judgment for the plaintiff for £500 damages and costs