Nominal Defendant v Richards & Anor

The appeal concerned the application of section 28 of the *Motor Accidents Act 1988* (NSW) and whether the trial judge had erred in finding that the identity of the vehicle involved in an accident could not be established. The Nominal Defendant was the appellant, and the first respondent was the party seeking damages.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the trial judge's conclusion that the identity of the vehicle was not established was correct. This question arose in the context of the Nominal Defendant's liability under the *Motor Accidents Act 1988*.

The court's reasoning, as indicated by the orders made, suggests that the appeal was not yet finally determined. The Nominal Defendant was directed to re-list the appeal after providing notice of an application to amend its Notice of Appeal to the first respondent. This indicates that the substantive arguments regarding the trial judge's findings and the application of section 28 were to be considered at a later hearing, with the first respondent present. The court also contemplated the possibility of restitution of monies paid pending a new trial, implying that the original judgment might be subject to variation or reversal.