RAUCHLE v THE NOMINAL DEFENDANT; THE NSW POLICE SERVICE v THE NOMINAL DEFENDANT and ANOR [1998] NSWCA 181

RAUCHLE v THE NOMINAL DEFENDANT; THE NSW POLICE SERVICE v THE NOMINAL DEFENDANT and ANOR [1998] NSWCA 181

On appeal, no error was demonstrated in the trial judge's findings of fact, which were substantially based on credibility assessments of witnesses and not glaringly improbable or inconsistent with incontrovertible facts; the conclusions that the accident was caused by Cst Rauchle's excessive speed were open on the evidence.

Parties
Appellant (in CA 40137 of 1996): Cst Rauchle; Appellant (in CA 40138 of 1996): NSW Police Service; Respondent: Nominal Defendant; Second Respondent (in CA 40138), Cross Appellant: Cst Byrnes
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 July 1998
Procedural Posture
Appeal and New Trial / Appeal Against Judgment of Mc Lachlan DCJ
Outcome
Appeals and cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Appellate Review—findings of Fact, Credibility of Witnesses, Motor Vehicle Accident Liability, Judicial Reasoning—adequacy of Reasons
Torts Motor Vehicle Accidents Civil Procedure Appellate Review—findings of Fact Credibility of Witnesses Motor Vehicle Accident Liability Judicial Reasoning—adequacy of Reasons

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cst Rauchle

Appellant (in CA 40137 of 1996)

NSW Police Service

Appellant (in CA 40138 of 1996)

Nominal Defendant

Respondent

Cst Byrnes

Second Respondent (in CA 40138), Cross Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal and New Trial / Appeal Against Judgment of Mc Lachlan DCJ

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge's findings of fact, based at least in part upon credibility of witnesses, were glaringly improbable or inconsistent with incontrovertible evidence
  2. 2 Whether error was demonstrated in the trial judge's findings that the accident was not caused by an unidentified motor vehicle but by Cst Rauchle driving too fast
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge misused the advantage of having seen and heard the witnesses

Ratio Decidendi

On appeal, no error was demonstrated in the trial judge's findings of fact, which were substantially based on credibility assessments of witnesses and not glaringly improbable or inconsistent with incontrovertible facts; the conclusions that the accident was caused by Cst Rauchle's excessive speed were open on the evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeals and cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • In CA 40137 of 1996: Appeal dismissed; Appellant to pay costs of the Respondent to the appeal.
  • In CA 40138 of 1996: Appeal dismissed; Cross-appeal dismissed; Appellant to pay costs of the Respondents to the appeal, including First Respondent's costs if any regarding cross-appeal.