Passmore v Maitland City Council

The appeal concerned a claim brought by the appellant, Ms. Passmore, against the Maitland City Council. Ms. Passmore alleged that she suffered injury due to the condition of a tennis court maintained by the Council. The primary judge found that Ms. Passmore had not proven her injury was caused by the condition of the tennis court. The appeal was heard in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales by Basten and White JJA, and Sackville AJA.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the primary judge had erred in finding that Ms. Passmore had failed to establish causation between the condition of the tennis court and her injury, and whether the primary judge had erred in refusing to grant an adjournment of the hearing. Additionally, the Court considered whether the primary judge had erred in ordering that the question of liability be determined separately and in advance of other issues.

The Court of Appeal found no error in the primary judge's decision. The primary judge was entitled to accept the evidence of the respondent's witnesses regarding the condition of the tennis court and the lack of causation. The refusal to grant an adjournment was also within the primary judge's discretion and did not involve an error of principle. Similarly, the decision to order a separate determination of liability was a procedural matter within the primary judge's power and was not wrongly exercised.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal granted the appellant leave to rely on the second amended notice of appeal but dismissed the appeal. The appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the first and second respondents.