Shayne Henderson v Darren McLean (Taree) [2007] NSWDC 199

Shayne Henderson v Darren McLean (Taree) [2007] NSWDC 199

The 1st Defendant breached his duty of care because, on the accepted evidence, he saw the plaintiff with sufficient time and distance to brake, stop or move left and avoid the collision, but failed to take adequate evasive action. The plaintiff was nevertheless extremely foolhardy in crossing the highway in the circumstances and was contributorily negligent to the extent of 70%, reducing assessed damages of $496,084 to judgment for $148,825.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Motor Vehicle Accident Negligence Claim for Damages / Trial Judgment in Civil Proceedings; Proceedings Between the Plaintiff and the 2nd Defendant Were Settled Prior to Commencement of the Hearing
Outcome
Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff against the 1st Defendant in the amount of $148,825, with costs on the ordinary basis and a stay of enforcement up to and including 8 November 2007.
Legal Topics
['negligence' 'breach of Duty of Care' 'contributory Negligence' 'non Economic Loss' 'economic Loss' 'out of Pocket Expenses' 'attendant Care Services']
['tort Law' 'motor Vehicle Accidents' 'personal Injury Damages'] ['negligence' 'breach of Duty of Care' 'contributory Negligence' 'non Economic Loss' 'economic Loss' 'out of Pocket Expenses' 'attendant Care Services']

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

Motor Vehicle Accident Negligence Claim for Damages / Trial Judgment in Civil Proceedings; Proceedings Between the Plaintiff and the 2nd Defendant Were Settled Prior to Commencement of the Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the 1st Defendant breached his duty of care by failing to take evasive action to avoid colliding with the plaintiff pedestrian on the Pacific Highway.' 'Whether and to what extent the plaintiff was contributorily negligent.' 'Assessment of damages under the Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999.']

Ratio Decidendi

The 1st Defendant breached his duty of care because, on the accepted evidence, he saw the plaintiff with sufficient time and distance to brake, stop or move left and avoid the collision, but failed to take adequate evasive action. The plaintiff was nevertheless extremely foolhardy in crossing the highway in the circumstances and was contributorily negligent to the extent of 70%, reducing assessed damages of $496,084 to judgment for $148,825.

Court Disposition

Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff against the 1st Defendant in the amount of $148,825, with costs on the ordinary basis and a stay of enforcement up to and including 8 November 2007.

Orders

  • ['Verdict and Judgment for the plaintiff against the Defendant in the amount of $148,825' "Order the 1st Defendant to pay the Plaintiff's costs of the proceedings against 1st Defendant, such costs to be agreed or assessed on the ordinary basis" 'I direct that the exhibits be retained in the registry for six weeks'...