KERR & SWANSTON V. KELLER

KERR & SWANSTON V. KELLER

No negligence on the part of Swanston was established. The proximate and only effective cause of the collision was Keller's negligence in driving on the wrong side of the road. The emergency was created by Keller, and Swanston acted reasonably in the circumstances. Accordingly, the claim should succeed, and the counterclaim should be dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Kerr; Appellant: Swanston; Respondent: Keller
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 September 1954
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Supreme Court of Queensland
Outcome
Appeal allowed; original judgment set aside.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Motor Vehicle Collision
Torts Negligence Contributory Negligence Motor Vehicle Collision

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kerr

Appellant

Swanston

Appellant

Keller

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal From Supreme Court of Queensland

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Swanston (the appellant's driver) was negligent, wholly or partly, in causing the collision with Keller.
  2. 2 Whether the collision was caused solely by Keller's negligence.
  3. 3 Whether the doctrine of contributory negligence applied.

Ratio Decidendi

No negligence on the part of Swanston was established. The proximate and only effective cause of the collision was Keller's negligence in driving on the wrong side of the road. The emergency was created by Keller, and Swanston acted reasonably in the circumstances. Accordingly, the claim should succeed, and the counterclaim should be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; original judgment set aside.

Orders

  • Judgment for the plaintiffs (Kerr and Swanston) for £1400 and £150 respectively, with costs.
  • Counterclaim dismissed with costs.