MCKENZIE V. WHITEHEAD AND ANOTHER

MCKENZIE V. WHITEHEAD AND ANOTHER

The trial judge did not misdirect himself, nor commit any error regarding the facts or exercise of discretion in assessing damages; the amount was not demonstrated to be inadequate to the extent requiring appellate intervention.

Parties
Respondent: Whitehead; Appellant: McKenzie
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 September 1968
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Assessment of Damages
Torts Assessment of Damages

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Whitehead

Respondent

McKenzie

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in the assessment of damages
  2. 2 Whether the damages awarded were so inadequate as to constitute an error in the exercise of discretion

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge did not misdirect himself, nor commit any error regarding the facts or exercise of discretion in assessing damages; the amount was not demonstrated to be inadequate to the extent requiring appellate intervention.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs