Metrolink Victoria Pty Ltd v Inglis

In the case of Metrolink Victoria Pty Ltd v Inglis, the plaintiff, Metrolink Victoria, sought damages for losses it suffered following a collision between one of its trams and a car driven by the defendant, Inglis. The dispute arose from the question of whether certain losses incurred by Metrolink Victoria, specifically lost profits under a contract contingent on the operation of the tram network, were recoverable under the tort of negligence. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the losses suffered by Metrolink Victoria were of a kind reasonably foreseeable as a consequence of the collision, and whether they were recoverable under the applicable principles of remoteness of damages. The court had to determine whether the losses were too remote a consequence of the collision and whether they could be characterised as a kind of loss that was reasonably foreseeable.

The court held that the losses suffered by Metrolink Victoria were not too remote a consequence of the collision. It found that the losses were of a kind reasonably foreseeable, as the operation of the tram network was directly impacted by the collision. The court further held that the lost profits under the contract were a direct result of the disruption to the tram network, which was a foreseeable consequence of the collision. As such, the losses were not too remote to be recoverable.

The court ordered that the defendant, Inglis, pay damages to Metrolink Victoria for the lost profits under the contract, as well as any other losses directly caused by the collision. The specific amount of damages was to be determined in further proceedings.