Commissioner for Railways v Dowle

The Commissioner for Railways appealed to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Full Court) which had dismissed an appeal from a jury verdict. The jury had found in favour of the plaintiff, Rita May Dowle, the widow of Henry Maxwell Dowle, who had died when his truck collided with a train at a level crossing. The Commissioner denied negligence and alleged contributory negligence on the part of the deceased.

The legal issues before the High Court were whether it was open to the jury to find that the Commissioner was negligent in its control of the level crossing and whether it was open to the jury to find that the deceased was not guilty of contributory negligence. The Commissioner sought to have the jury's verdict set aside and a verdict entered in its favour.

The Court reasoned that the character of the level crossing, including its acute angle to the road, the lack of obstruction to vision between the road and the railway, and the potential for significant traffic on race days, necessitated special care. The Court affirmed the duty of railway commissioners to take all reasonably necessary steps to ensure the safety of persons using a crossing, including providing reasonable warning of approaching trains where gates are not used. The Court found that the evidence, including the deceased's truck's construction which obstructed rear vision and the potential impact of wind on the train's whistle, supported the jury's inference that the deceased may have attempted to look for approaching trains and that the Commissioner's precautions were insufficient. The Court also held that the dilemma presented regarding contributory negligence – that the deceased either did not look or looked and took the risk – was not a conclusive one, and it was open to the jury to infer that the deceased had taken reasonable precautions.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the jury's verdict that the Commissioner was negligent and that the deceased was not contributorily negligent.