Maureen Townsend v Phillip O’Donnell [2016] NSWCA 288

Maureen Townsend v Phillip O’Donnell [2016] NSWCA 288

The appeal was dismissed because the primary Judge did not err in finding no contributory negligence and correctly applied the legal principles regarding future economic loss and residual earning capacity.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['contributory Negligence' 'motor Vehicle Accident' 'future Economic Loss']
['torts' 'damages'] ['contributory Negligence' 'motor Vehicle Accident' 'future Economic Loss']

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

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the primary Judge erred in finding no contributory negligence' "Whether the primary Judge erred in findings as to the motor vehicle's speed and the postman keeping a proper lookout" 'Whether the primary Judge erred in assessing damages for future economic loss' 'Whether the primary Judge applied the principles stated in Malec v JC Hutton Pty Ltd']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the primary Judge did not err in finding no contributory negligence and correctly applied the legal principles regarding future economic loss and residual earning capacity.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed' "The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal"]