Nominal Defendant v Meakes

The appeal concerned an action brought by a pedestrian, the respondent, against the Nominal Defendant under s 34(1) of the *Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999* (NSW). The dispute arose from a road accident where the pedestrian was allegedly struck by an unidentified vehicle. The primary judge had found in favour of the pedestrian, awarding damages for economic loss.

The legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the pedestrian had made "due inquiry and search" to identify the vehicle as required by the Act, whether the finding of no contributory negligence on the pedestrian's part should be set aside, and whether the evidence supported the finding of a loss of earning capacity.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, setting aside the orders of the primary judge and entering judgment for the Nominal Defendant. The court reasoned that the pedestrian had not discharged the onus of proving that due inquiry and search had been made to identify the vehicle. Furthermore, the court found that the evidence did not sufficiently support the finding of a loss of earning capacity. Consequently, the respondent was ordered to pay the Nominal Defendant's costs of both the District Court proceedings and the appeal.