SACHSE AND ANOTHER V. BROWN

SACHSE AND ANOTHER V. BROWN

Both the deceased and appellant Sachse owed duties to prevent electricity feed-back; both neglected explicit precautions agreed upon, both were equally negligent, and equal apportionment of damages is justified.

Parties
Appellant: SACHSE; Appellant: CLARK; Respondent's Deceased Husband: BROWN (Frank Richard Brown, deceased); Respondent: Mrs Brown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 October 1964
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Fatal Accidents, Apportionment of Damages
Torts Negligence Contributory Negligence Fatal Accidents Apportionment 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 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SACHSE

Appellant

CLARK

Appellant

BROWN (Frank Richard Brown, deceased)

Respondent's Deceased Husband

Mrs Brown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether negligence of the appellants causally contributed to the death of Brown
  2. 2 Proper apportionment of responsibility for damages between deceased and appellants
  3. 3 Whether the deceased's negligence was greater than that of the appellants

Ratio Decidendi

Both the deceased and appellant Sachse owed duties to prevent electricity feed-back; both neglected explicit precautions agreed upon, both were equally negligent, and equal apportionment of damages is justified.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Judgment for respondent as per Supreme Court of Western Australia, damages amount £3,980.