Hamshere v Favelle [2009] NSWCA 4

Hamshere v Favelle [2009] NSWCA 4

There was no foreseeable risk of sufficient magnitude to have caused a reasonable person in the respondent's position to refrain from opening his car door to the extent he did. The appellant's loss of control, excessive speed, and inexperience, rather than any negligence by the respondent, led to the collision. The respondent was not negligent as he acted with reasonable care in the circumstances.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
['negligence' 'motor Vehicle Accident']
['torts'] ['negligence' 'motor Vehicle Accident']

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 / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the respondent was negligent in opening or leaving open his car door into the traffic way, causing a collision with the appellant's motorcycle"]

Ratio Decidendi

There was no foreseeable risk of sufficient magnitude to have caused a reasonable person in the respondent's position to refrain from opening his car door to the extent he did. The appellant's loss of control, excessive speed, and inexperience, rather than any negligence by the respondent, led to the collision. The respondent was not negligent as he acted with reasonable care in the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed' "Appellant to pay respondent's costs"]