Goode v Angland [2017] NSWCA 311

Goode v Angland [2017] NSWCA 311

Section 5L of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) applies to professional horseracing as a 'dangerous recreational activity', providing a complete defence to negligence for injuries arising from obvious risks, such as a jockey falling during a race. No error was found in the primary judge’s use of video and photographic evidence or in declining to find negligence against the respondent.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment Following Trial Verdict in Negligence Claim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['negligence' 'civil Liability Act 2002 (nsw) Ss 5 K, 5 L' "meaning of 'recreational Activity'" 'professional Sport Liability' 'use of Photographic and Video Evidence in Fact Finding']
['torts' 'evidence'] ['negligence' 'civil Liability Act 2002 (nsw) Ss 5 K, 5 L' "meaning of 'recreational Activity'" 'professional Sport Liability' 'use of Photographic and Video Evidence in Fact Finding']

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 / Court of Appeal Judgment Following Trial Verdict in Negligence Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Does s 5L of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) provide a complete defence to a negligence claim arising from professional horseracing injuries as an 'obvious risk' of a 'dangerous recreational activity'?" 'Did the primary judge err by impermissibly using his own interpretation of photographic and video evidence?' "Did the primary judge make an error in not finding that the respondent jockey negligently changed direction, causing the appellant's fall?"]

Ratio Decidendi

Section 5L of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) applies to professional horseracing as a 'dangerous recreational activity', providing a complete defence to negligence for injuries arising from obvious risks, such as a jockey falling during a race. No error was found in the primary judge’s use of video and photographic evidence or in declining to find negligence against the respondent.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs.']