John Veigel v Christine Broughton & Ors; Christine Broughton v Nominal Defendant & Ors [2009] NSWDC 397

John Veigel v Christine Broughton & Ors; Christine Broughton v Nominal Defendant & Ors [2009] NSWDC 397

On the balance of probabilities, Mr Dean Davis was driving the offending vehicle which, due to his negligent driving, caused Mrs Broughton's vehicle to cross into the path of Mr Veigel's car, resulting in a collision and injuries to both plaintiffs. Identification evidence against Mr Dee was mistaken. Proceedings against Messrs Dee and Bell and the Nominal Defendant are dismissed. Judgment is entered for each of Mr Veigel and Mrs Broughton against Mr Davis.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 June 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil / Retrial After Appeal
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiffs against Mr Dean Davis; proceedings against Messrs Dee, Elwin Bell, and Nominal Defendant dismissed.
Legal Topics
['negligence' 'causation' 'motor Vehicle Accident' 'identification Evidence' 'failure to Call Witness' 'liability Determination' 'retrial Procedure']
['tort Law' 'motor Vehicle Accidents' 'negligence'] ['negligence' 'causation' 'motor Vehicle Accident' 'identification Evidence' 'failure to Call Witness' 'liability Determination' 'retrial Procedure']

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

Civil / Retrial After Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Who was responsible for the collision on 11 February 2001 near Bega?' 'Was the offending vehicle driven by Mr Dee or Mr Davis?' 'Reliability of identification evidence concerning the offending vehicle' 'Whether the identity of the vehicle cannot be established, triggering Nominal Defendant liability' 'Credibility and significance of witness testimony and lies' 'Significance of flight after collision']

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities, Mr Dean Davis was driving the offending vehicle which, due to his negligent driving, caused Mrs Broughton's vehicle to cross into the path of Mr Veigel's car, resulting in a collision and injuries to both plaintiffs. Identification evidence against Mr Dee was mistaken. Proceedings against Messrs Dee and Bell and the Nominal Defendant are dismissed. Judgment is entered for each of Mr Veigel and Mrs Broughton against Mr Davis.

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiffs against Mr Dean Davis; proceedings against Messrs Dee, Elwin Bell, and Nominal Defendant dismissed.

Orders

  • ["In 8279/02: Judgment in favour of the plaintiff against the fifth defendant (Mr Dean Davis). Judgment in favour of the second, third, and fourth defendants. Fifth defendant to pay plaintiff's costs. Fifth defendant to pay costs of second, third, and fourth defendants." "In 1082/04: Judgment in favour of the...