Brockman v Serco Sodexo Defence Services Pty Ltd [2016] NSWCA 41

Brockman v Serco Sodexo Defence Services Pty Ltd [2016] NSWCA 41

Applicant failed to establish a reasonably clear case of injustice or any legal question of principle or public importance; the appeal grounds turn only on rejected factual findings or inferences; the primary judge’s findings about the applicant’s failure to take reasonable precautions in context were open; therefore, leave to appeal refused.

Parties
Applicant: Nigel Brockman; Respondent: Serco Sodexo Defence Services Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed, with costs.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Leave to Appeal, Reasonable Precautions, Civil Appeals
Tort Law Personal Injury Negligence Contributory Negligence Leave to Appeal Reasonable Precautions Civil Appeals

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nigel Brockman

Applicant

Serco Sodexo Defence Services Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was an error in finding of primary negligence against the applicant
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was entitled to assume the pedestrian would remain stationary
  3. 3 Whether the applicant took reasonable precautions to avoid the accident

Ratio Decidendi

Applicant failed to establish a reasonably clear case of injustice or any legal question of principle or public importance; the appeal grounds turn only on rejected factual findings or inferences; the primary judge’s findings about the applicant’s failure to take reasonable precautions in context were open; therefore, leave to appeal refused.

Court Disposition

Summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed, with costs.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal refused
  • Applicant to pay respondent’s costs