Jeleskovic v Wagner (No. 2) [2020] NSWDC 126

Jeleskovic v Wagner (No. 2) [2020] NSWDC 126

The plaintiff proved that the defendant intentionally pushed him, but did not prove that she pushed him at the stairwell or with intent to injure him. The Court preferred the defendant's account that the push occurred in the bathroom in response to the plaintiff's conduct, and held that damages were governed by the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), not the unmodified common law. The plaintiff also failed to establish breach because the risk that a push in the bathroom would cause him to fall down the stairs was far-fetched and not shown to be not insignificant. In any event, causation was not proved: the push was not a necessary condition of the fall, which more probably resulted from the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim for Damages for Personal Injuries in Negligence Arising From a Domestic Incident and Fall Down Stairs / Principal Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Verdict and judgment for the defendant; plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs.
Legal Topics
['intentional Act and Intent to Injure Under Civil Liability Act 2002 (nsw), S 3 B' 'duty of Care and Breach' 'factual Causation' 'non Economic Loss' 'aggravated and Exemplary Damages' 'contributory Negligence']
['torts' 'negligence' 'personal Injury Damages'] ['intentional Act and Intent to Injure Under Civil Liability Act 2002 (nsw), S 3 B' 'duty of Care and Breach' 'factual Causation' 'non Economic Loss' 'aggravated and Exemplary Damages' 'contributory Negligence']

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

Civil Claim for Damages for Personal Injuries in Negligence Arising From a Domestic Incident and Fall Down Stairs / Principal Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant pushed or touched the plaintiff' "Whether the defendant's conduct in pushing was done with the intent of injuring the plaintiff" 'Whether the push or touch caused the plaintiff to fall down the stairs' 'Whether the defendant breached a duty of care to the plaintiff' "Whether the plaintiff's falling down the stairs caused him to suffer personal injury and disability" 'What injuries and disabilities were suffered by the plaintiff' 'What heads of damage, if any, were recoverable' 'Whether any damages should be reduced for contributory negligence']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff proved that the defendant intentionally pushed him, but did not prove that she pushed him at the stairwell or with intent to injure him. The Court preferred the defendant's account that the push occurred in the bathroom in response to the plaintiff's conduct, and held that damages were governed by the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), not the unmodified common law. The plaintiff also failed to establish breach because the risk that a push in the bathroom would cause him to fall down the stairs was far-fetched and not shown to be not insignificant. In any event, causation was not proved: the push was not a necessary condition of the fall, which more probably resulted from the...

Court Disposition

Verdict and judgment for the defendant; plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs.

Orders

  • ["Verdict and Judgment for the defendant with the plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs." 'Liberty to apply to the parties within 14 days if there be any application to vary the order for costs.' 'Exhibits may be returned after 28 days.']