Goodrich Aerospace Pty Ltd v Arsic

Goodrich Aerospace Pty Ltd appealed to the New South Wales Court of Appeal against findings of fact made by Ainslie-Wallace DCJ in the District Court. The dispute concerned the liability of Goodrich Aerospace Pty Ltd for injuries sustained by Mr Arsic.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the primary judge erred in her findings of fact, particularly in relation to the credibility of witnesses and the weight given to their evidence. Key issues included the role of demeanour evidence when assessing witnesses from different cultural and ethnic backgrounds, the importance of considering probabilities and consistency with other evidence, and whether the primary judge had failed to examine all material facts relevant to the issues in dispute. The adequacy of the primary judge's reasons, including her explanation of demeanour findings, was also a central consideration.

The Court of Appeal found that the primary judge had placed undue emphasis on demeanour evidence, especially in circumstances where witnesses came from diverse cultural and ethnic backgrounds, and had not adequately considered the probabilities and consistency of the evidence with other material facts. The Court held that the primary judge's reasons were insufficient in explaining how she arrived at her findings, particularly concerning the assessment of witness credibility. Consequently, the Court of Appeal set aside the orders of the District Court, remitted the issue of liability for retrial, and reduced the damages awarded.