Caldwell v Ingham [2005] NSWSC 483

Caldwell v Ingham [2005] NSWSC 483

RTA had actual knowledge by 1994 of a significant accident history and sight distance problem at the intersection, and its response permitting continued filtered right turns into Pretoria Parade was inadequate and contrary to applicable traffic signal guidance; a reasonable response would at least have prohibited filtered turns during the relevant period, and failure to do so was causative because the accident was the materialisation of the very risk created. Ms Ingham was primarily negligent in failing to see and give way to the oncoming motorcycle, but contributory negligence by Mr Caldwell was not proved. Responsibility was apportioned 70% to Ms Ingham and 30% to RTA, and damages were...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Damages Claim Arising From a Motor Vehicle Collision, With Cross Claim Against a Road Authority / Judgment After Hearing on Liability, Contributory Negligence, Damages and Proposed Verdicts; Interest and Further Orders Stood Over
Outcome
Verdicts proposed for Mr Caldwell against Ms Ingham and RTA, with costs apportioned 70% to Ms Ingham and 30% to RTA; interest and further orders stood over.
Legal Topics
['duty and Breach by Road Authority' 'traffic Signal Phasing and Filtered Right Turns' 'contributory Negligence' 'causation' 'apportionment of Responsibility' 'assessment of Personal Injury Damages' 'application of Civil Liability Act 2002 and Motor Accidents Act 1988']
['torts' 'negligence' 'motor Accidents' 'civil Liability' 'damages'] ['duty and Breach by Road Authority' 'traffic Signal Phasing and Filtered Right Turns' 'contributory Negligence' 'causation' 'apportionment of Responsibility' 'assessment of Personal Injury Damages' 'application of Civil Liability Act 2002 and Motor Accidents Act 1988']

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

Personal Injury Damages Claim Arising From a Motor Vehicle Collision, With Cross Claim Against a Road Authority / Judgment After Hearing on Liability, Contributory Negligence, Damages and Proposed Verdicts; Interest and Further Orders Stood Over

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Civil Liability Act 2002 governed Mr Caldwell's claim against RTA." 'Whether RTA breached its duty of care by permitting filtered right turns at the intersection or by failing to monitor and remedy accident risks.' 'Whether any negligence of RTA caused or contributed to the collision.' 'Whether Mr Caldwell was contributorily negligent by speed, lookout, failure to stop at amber lights, or driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.' 'How liability should be apportioned between Ms Ingham and RTA.' "What damages should be assessed for Mr Caldwell's injuries and losses."]

Ratio Decidendi

RTA had actual knowledge by 1994 of a significant accident history and sight distance problem at the intersection, and its response permitting continued filtered right turns into Pretoria Parade was inadequate and contrary to applicable traffic signal guidance; a reasonable response would at least have prohibited filtered turns during the relevant period, and failure to do so was causative because the accident was the materialisation of the very risk created. Ms Ingham was primarily negligent in failing to see and give way to the oncoming motorcycle, but contributory negligence by Mr Caldwell was not proved. Responsibility was apportioned 70% to Ms Ingham and 30% to RTA, and damages were...

Court Disposition

Verdicts proposed for Mr Caldwell against Ms Ingham and RTA, with costs apportioned 70% to Ms Ingham and 30% to RTA; interest and further orders stood over.

Orders

  • ['Proposed verdict for Mr Caldwell against Ms Ingham in the sum of $608,470.' 'Proposed verdict for Mr Caldwell against RTA in the sum of $270,523.' "Proposed order that Ms Ingham and RTA pay Mr Caldwell's costs, apportioned 70% to Ms Ingham and 30% to RTA." 'Matter stood over until 3 August at 9.30am, or another...