Solomons v Pallier

The appeal in *Solomons v Pallier* concerned a motor vehicle accident in which the respondent, a passenger, suffered injuries while travelling in a vehicle driven by the appellant. The primary dispute revolved around whether the primary judge erred in finding that the driver intentionally drove the vehicle partly off the roadway, causing the accident, and consequently, whether the respondent was contributorily negligent.

The court was required to determine two principal legal issues. Firstly, it had to consider whether the primary judge had erred in finding that the driver intentionally drove the vehicle off the roadway. Secondly, the court had to assess whether the primary judge erred in finding no reduction of damages for contributory negligence, specifically considering the respondent's age (16 years old), their actual or constructive knowledge of the driver's impairment (which was found to be mild), and the driver's intentional act of driving off the roadway.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, setting aside the original judgment. The court found that the primary judge had erred in failing to reduce the respondent's damages for contributory negligence. Applying the principles of negligence and contributory negligence, the court determined that a reasonable person in the respondent's position, despite their age and the driver's mild intoxication, would have taken the precaution of declining to travel with the driver, given the foreseeable risk of harm. The court concluded that a just and equitable reduction of 25% was appropriate. The judgment was varied to reflect this reduction, and the appellant was ordered to pay 25% of the respondent's costs of the appeal.