Cheng v Geussens

In *Cheng v Geussens*, the Court of Appeal of New South Wales considered an appeal concerning a motor vehicle accident where a cyclist was struck by a car. The primary dispute revolved around the apportionment of responsibility for the collision, with the trial judge finding that neither party had a green light and that both had failed to keep a proper lookout.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the trial judge had erred in assessing the proportionate responsibility of the parties and, consequently, in the quantum of damages awarded to the plaintiff. Specifically, the court had to determine if the factual basis upon which the assessment of contributory negligence was made was sound, and if the resulting reduction in damages was appropriate.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that an assessment of proportionate responsibility should be made on a common factual basis, and that the trial judge's findings did not adequately reflect this. The court found that the plaintiff cyclist bore a greater degree of responsibility for the accident than was initially determined. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the original order setting aside the damages award was varied, and the plaintiff's damages were reduced by 67% due to contributory negligence. The respondent was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.