Bates v Gillham

In *Bates v Gillham*, the plaintiff, Mr Bates, appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a District Court judgment that found the defendant, Mr Gillham, liable in negligence. The dispute arose from a motor vehicle collision where the plaintiff's vehicle collided with the defendant's vehicle, which was stationary in the centre lane of a road, waiting to execute a right-hand turn. The plaintiff contended that the defendant's actions in making the turn constituted a breach of his duty of care.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, and if so, whether the defendant breached that duty by attempting to turn right across painted lines, which was not an unlawful manoeuvre. The court was required to consider whether a reasonable person in the defendant's position would have attempted the turn, taking into account factors such as the line of sight for following vehicles and the prevailing road and traffic conditions.

The Court of Appeal determined that the defendant did not breach his duty of care. The court reasoned that the manoeuvre undertaken by the defendant was not inherently unlawful and that, in the circumstances, a reasonable driver would not have foreseen the collision. The plaintiff's own actions in failing to maintain a proper lookout and to react to the defendant's vehicle were considered the primary cause of the accident.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, setting aside the District Court's judgment and orders. Judgment was entered for the defendant, with the plaintiff ordered to pay the costs of the trial. The respondent (the defendant) was also ordered to pay the appellant's (the plaintiff's) costs of the appeal and was granted a certificate under the Suitors’ Fund Act 1951 (NSW).