Qui v Obeid

The appeal concerned a motor accident where the plaintiff, Ms Qui, sustained injuries and sought compensation under the *Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999* (NSW). The central dispute revolved around the precise manoeuvre being undertaken by Ms Qui's vehicle at the moment of collision with the respondent's vehicle. The primary judge had found that Ms Qui's car was either executing a U-turn or a right turn when the collision occurred.

The legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the primary judge had erred in their factual findings regarding the plaintiff's manoeuvre at the time of the collision. Specifically, the court had to determine if the evidence supported the finding that the plaintiff's vehicle was not merely parked kerbside but was engaged in a turn.

The Court of Appeal found no error in the primary judge's factual findings. The court applied the principles of appellate review, which generally defer to the findings of fact made by the trial judge unless there is a demonstrable error. The evidence presented at trial was considered sufficient to support the conclusion that the plaintiff's vehicle was performing a turn, rather than being stationary and parked.

Consequently, the appeal and the cross-appeal were dismissed. The appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.