Woodbridge v Commissioner for Main Roads (NSW) [1938] HCA 61

Woodbridge v Commissioner for Main Roads (NSW) [1938] HCA 61

Section 20 of the Transport (Division of Functions) Act 1932 (N.S.W.) does not operate to apply to an action against the Commissioner for Main Roads the limitation of £2,000 contained in section 18 of the Ministry of Transport Act 1932 (N.S.W.). This is because the general reference in section 18 to the Board of Commissioners cannot logically or linguistically be substituted by reference to a specific commissioner under the distribution scheme.

Parties
Appellant, Plaintiff: Leah Agnes Woodbridge; Respondent, Defendant: The Commissioner for Main Roads (N.S.W.)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal (from Supreme Court of New South Wales) / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Limitation of Damages, Referential Statutes, Immunity of Public Authorities
Transport Law Personal Injury Statutory Interpretation Limitation of Damages Referential Statutes Immunity of Public Authorities

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leah Agnes Woodbridge

Appellant, Plaintiff

The Commissioner for Main Roads (N.S.W.)

Respondent, Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (from Supreme Court of New South Wales) / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 18 of the Ministry of Transport Act 1932 (N.S.W.) (limiting damages to £2,000) applies to the Commissioner for Main Roads by virtue of section 20 of the Transport (Division of Functions) Act 1932 (N.S.W.)
  2. 2 Proper construction and application of section 20 of the Transport (Division of Functions) Act 1932 (N.S.W.)

Ratio Decidendi

Section 20 of the Transport (Division of Functions) Act 1932 (N.S.W.) does not operate to apply to an action against the Commissioner for Main Roads the limitation of £2,000 contained in section 18 of the Ministry of Transport Act 1932 (N.S.W.). This is because the general reference in section 18 to the Board of Commissioners cannot logically or linguistically be substituted by reference to a specific commissioner under the distribution scheme.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of the Supreme Court (Full Court) discharged
  • Defendant's (Commissioner for Main Roads) appeal and application to the Full Court dismissed with costs