WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION v GRAHAM [1992] NSWCA 265

WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION v GRAHAM [1992] NSWCA 265

Although the sheriff's officer's assistance to the jury was irregular, it was not of sufficient gravity to raise a reasonable suspicion of miscarriage of justice or impugn the fairness of the trial. The interest rate applied to damages cannot be challenged on appeal when it was agreed at trial and in accordance with the law at that time.

Parties
Appellant: Water Resources Commission; Respondent: Graham
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 May 1992
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Jury Irregularity, Damages Assessment, Interest on Damages, Judicial Discretion, Contact With Jury
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Jury Procedure Jury Irregularity Damages Assessment Interest on Damages Judicial Discretion Contact With Jury

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Water Resources Commission

Appellant

Graham

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conduct of a sheriff's officer in communicating with the jury amounted to an irregularity sufficient to cause a miscarriage of justice
  2. 2 Whether the interest rate allowed on the economic loss component of damages should be altered in accordance with later authority

Ratio Decidendi

Although the sheriff's officer's assistance to the jury was irregular, it was not of sufficient gravity to raise a reasonable suspicion of miscarriage of justice or impugn the fairness of the trial. The interest rate applied to damages cannot be challenged on appeal when it was agreed at trial and in accordance with the law at that time.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.