MOORE, MATHEWS & MANSFIELD JJ 16 MARCH 2001 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 1250 OF 2000
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN:
DENISE CONWAY APPELLANT
AND:
ALAN JACKSON RESPONDENT
JUDGES:
MOORE, MATHEWS & MANSFIELD JJ
DATE OF ORDER:
16 MARCH 2001
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The appeal is dismissed.
2. The appellant pay to the respondent costs of the appeal to be taxed.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 1250 OF 2000
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN:
DENISE CONWAY APPELLANT
AND:
ALAN JACKSON RESPONDENT
JUDGES:
MOORE,…
Grounds of appeal
[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.
[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.
[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.
Consideration
[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.
[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.
Continue reading Conway v Jackson
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Conway v Jackson [2001] FCA 230
Case
[2001] FCA 230
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Conway initiated proceedings against Jackson, claiming damages for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 11 February 2016. The primary dispute centred on the assessment of damages for injuries sustained in the accident. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland, where Conway's appeal against the primary judge's assessment of damages was dismissed. The legal issues before the court were whether the primary judge's assessment of damages was correct and whether there was any error in the application of the principles of damages for personal injury. The court considered the principles of assessment of damages for personal injury and the evidence presented regarding the extent and impact of the injuries. The court found that the primary judge had applied the correct principles and that the assessment of damages was appropriate in the circumstances. The court held that there was no error in the primary judge's assessment of damages, and the appeal was dismissed. The appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The appeal is dismissed.
2. The appellant pay to the respondent costs of the appeal to be taxed.