Field v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) [1957] HCA 92
The majority held that the plaintiff's admission to the medical expert was not privileged because it was not reasonably incidental to the settlement negotiations and was made without proper connection to the purpose of those negotiations. Thus, the evidence was admissible and the appeal should be dismissed. McTiernan J dissented, finding the admission was privileged and inadmissible.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Full Court of Supreme Court Regarding Refusal of New Trial
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- ['without Prejudice Privilege' 'admissibility of Admissions' 'jury Direction' 'personal Injury']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Full Court of Supreme Court Regarding Refusal of New Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether an admission made by the plaintiff to a doctor during a medical examination arranged during settlement negotiations is protected by 'without prejudice' privilege and thus inadmissible" "Whether the trial judge's direction to the jury on inherent probabilities and previous accounts amounted to misdirection"]
Ratio Decidendi
The majority held that the plaintiff's admission to the medical expert was not privileged because it was not reasonably incidental to the settlement negotiations and was made without proper connection to the purpose of those negotiations. Thus, the evidence was admissible and the appeal should be dismissed. McTiernan J dissented, finding the admission was privileged and inadmissible.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs
Orders
- ['Appeal dismissed with costs']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment