Roads and Traffic Authority v Royal
[2008] HCA 19
Citation 1
…irby J[78] set forth seven principles to be considered in determining the issue of causation. I have read and been assisted by those principles. [77] [2008] HCA 19 [78] at paragraphs 79-94 178 As stated, I am of the view there were various causes of the transport accident. The capacity of the advance direction s…
Pledge v Roads and Traffic Authority
[2004] HCA 13
Citation 2
…injury and loss. [79] March v E & MH Stramare Pty Ltd & Ors. ( supra ) at page 522 [80] See further Pledge v Roads and Traffic Authority 78 ALJR 572 – per Hayne J, at paragraph 9…
Brodie v Singleton Shire Council
[2001] HCA 29
Citation 3
…rred to in Brodie v Singleton Shire Council .[43] He stated the duty of care was as expressed by Gillard J in Montfroy v Roads Corporation .[44] [43] (2001) 206 CLR 512, at paragraph 35 [44] [2005] VSC 320, at paragraph 35 105 In summary, while accepting the defendant owed the plaintiff the duty of care, Mr Brookes s…
March v E & MH Stramare Pty Ltd
[1991] HCA 12
Citation 4
…the real effective cause’ ( Leyland Shipping Co v Norwich Union Fire Insurance Society [1918] AC 350 at 370).” [72] (1991) 171 CLR 506 [73] at 509…
Podbrebersek v Australian Iron & Steel Pty Ltd
[1985] HCA 34
Citation 5
…m the standard of care of the reasonable man … and of the relative importance of the acts of the parties in causing the damage. …” [82] [1985] HCA 34 [83] paragraph 8-10…
Jones v Dunkel
[1959] HCA 9
Citation 6
…, I could draw the inference that had they been called, their evidence would not have assisted the plaintiff’s case.[46] [46] See Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298, and O’Donnell v Reichard [1975] VR 916 113 In relation to Mr Daldry, Mr Brookes submitted that he had done precisely what the plaintiff had done, that is mi…
Jones v Dunkel
[1959] HCA 8
Citation 7
…the inference that had they been called, their evidence would not have assisted the plaintiff’s case.[46] [46] See Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298, and O’Donnell v Reichard [1975] VR 916 113 In relation to Mr Daldry, Mr Brookes submitted that he had done precisely what the plaintiff had done, that is misread the si…
Commissioner of Main Roads v Jones
[2005] HCA 27
Citation 8
…h upon one aspect, which is the centre of the litigation. [70] See Montfroy ( supra ), at paragraph 66, referring to Commission of Main Roads v Jones (2005) 79 ALJR 1104, at 1106 161 In considering this matter, I have had regard to the evidence of the plaintiff and Mr Daldry, and to the drivers observed by Ms Stewart.…
Montfroy v Roads Corporation
[2005] VSC 320
Citation 9
…il .[43] He stated the duty of care was as expressed by Gillard J in Montfroy v Roads Corporation .[44] [43] (2001) 206 CLR 512, at paragraph 35 [44] [2005] VSC 320, at paragraph 35 105 In summary, while accepting the defendant owed the plaintiff the duty of care, Mr Brookes submitted that there was no breach of…