MATTERSON V. COMMISSIONER FOR RAILWAYS 98/1943

MATTERSON V. COMMISSIONER FOR RAILWAYS 98/1943

There was overwhelming evidence that the deceased was guilty of contributory negligence as he failed to keep a proper lookout while crossing the railway in clear daylight and familiar surroundings, resulting in being struck by the train. Therefore, the trial judge was correct to withdraw the case from the jury and enter judgment for the defendant.

Parties
Plaintiff: Matterson; Defendant: Commissioner for Railways
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 July 1944
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Employer Liability, Duty of Care
Tort Law Negligence Contributory Negligence Employer Liability Duty of Care

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matterson

Plaintiff

Commissioner for Railways

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant was negligent in relation to the accident causing the death of the deceased.
  2. 2 Whether the deceased was guilty of contributory negligence barring recovery under the Compensation to Relatives Act 1897.

Ratio Decidendi

There was overwhelming evidence that the deceased was guilty of contributory negligence as he failed to keep a proper lookout while crossing the railway in clear daylight and familiar surroundings, resulting in being struck by the train. Therefore, the trial judge was correct to withdraw the case from the jury and enter judgment for the defendant.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.