Gromof v Pham [2019] NSWDC 318

Gromof v Pham [2019] NSWDC 318

The defendant breached his duty of care by moving and accelerating from a stationary position into a left turn across the footpath without seeing the plaintiff, who was readily observable and lawfully crossing the entrance to Westacott Lane. The risk of collision and serious injury to a pedestrian was foreseeable...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Negligence Claim Arising From a Motor Vehicle Accident / Liability Issues Determined Separately From Damages Pursuant to UCPR R 28.2
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant on the issue of liability, with no discount for contributory negligence.
Legal Topics
['motor Vehicle Collision With Pedestrian' 'separate Determination of Liability' 'contributory Negligence' 'blameless Motor Vehicle Accident']
['torts' 'negligence' 'motor Vehicle Accidents'] ['motor Vehicle Collision With Pedestrian' 'separate Determination of Liability' 'contributory Negligence' 'blameless Motor Vehicle Accident']

Source-derived case record

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

Civil Negligence Claim Arising From a Motor Vehicle Accident / Liability Issues Determined Separately From Damages Pursuant to UCPR R 28.2

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What were the most probable factual circumstances of the collision' 'Whether the defendant was negligent in the events leading to the collision' 'Whether there was contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff' "Whether the plaintiff's injuries should be deemed to have occurred as a result of a blameless motor vehicle accident within the meaning of s 7A of the Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (NSW)"]

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant breached his duty of care by moving and accelerating from a stationary position into a left turn across the footpath without seeing the plaintiff, who was readily observable and lawfully crossing the entrance to Westacott Lane. The risk of collision and serious injury to a pedestrian was foreseeable and not insignificant, and reasonable precautions such as keeping a proper lookout, remaining stationary, and controlling speed were simple and should have been taken. The defendant's negligence was the sole cause of the plaintiff's injuries, and contributory negligence was not established.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant on the issue of liability, with no discount for contributory negligence.

Orders

  • ['Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant on the issue of liability' "The defendant is to pay the plaintiff's costs of the liability hearing on the ordinary basis unless otherwise ordered" 'The exhibits may be returned' 'Liberty to apply on 7 days notice if further or other orders are required']