TUCKER V. TUCKER & HAWKE

TUCKER V. TUCKER & HAWKE

Contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff was not established and thus no apportionment of damages was required; negligence by Hawke in not illuminating the tail light did not cause the accident, so no contribution was ordered. The defendant's negligence was the proximate cause of the injuries sustained.

Parties
Plaintiff: Tucker; Defendant: Tucker; Third Party: Hawke
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 August 1956
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Personal Injury, Apportionment of Liability
Torts Negligence Contributory Negligence Personal Injury Apportionment of Liability

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tucker

Plaintiff

Tucker

Defendant

Hawke

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent so as to reduce damages under sec. 27a of the Wrongs Act 1936-1951 (S.A.)
  2. 2 Whether the third party, Hawke, should contribute to damages under sec. 25 of the Wrongs Act 1936-1951 (S.A.)
  3. 3 Whether the statutory breaches by the plaintiff constituted negligence

Ratio Decidendi

Contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff was not established and thus no apportionment of damages was required; negligence by Hawke in not illuminating the tail light did not cause the accident, so no contribution was ordered. The defendant's negligence was the proximate cause of the injuries sustained.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The defendant appellant is to pay the costs of the appeal of the plaintiff respondent and of the third party respondent.