KENDALL v SMITH [1990] NSWCA 104

KENDALL v SMITH [1990] NSWCA 104

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge was not satisfied, based on evidence and credibility of witnesses, that 'El Unico' caused or contributed to the plaintiff's injuries, and the plaintiff failed to discharge the onus of proof.

Parties
Appellant: Kendall; Respondent: Smith
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 December 1990
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Credibility of Witnesses, Onus of Proof, Principles From Jones V Dunkel, Appeals on Facts
Tort Credibility of Witnesses Onus of Proof Principles From Jones V Dunkel Appeals on Facts

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kendall

Appellant

Smith

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in rejecting evidence implicating 'El Unico' and Stirling Smith in the accident
  2. 2 Whether failure to call the rider of 'El Unico' should invoke Jones v Dunkel principles
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff discharged the onus of proof

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge was not satisfied, based on evidence and credibility of witnesses, that 'El Unico' caused or contributed to the plaintiff's injuries, and the plaintiff failed to discharge the onus of proof.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.