Sorenson v Woolnough - [1989] TASSC 36

Serial No 32/1989
List "A"

CITATION: Sorenson v Woolnough [1989] TASSC 36; A32/1989

PARTIES:  SORENSON
  v
  WOOLNOUGH

TITLE OF COURT:  SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA
JURISDICTION:  ORIGINAL
FILE NO/S:  416/1987
DELIVERED ON:  23 August 1989
JUDGMENT OF:  Underwood J

Judgment Number: A32/1989
Number of paragraphs: 54

Serial No 32/1989
List "A"
File No 416/1987

SORENSON v WOOLNOUGH

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT UNDERWOOD J

23 August 1989

The plaintiff's claim is for damages for negligent driving.

On the evening of 21 July 1984 the plaintiff and the defendant were spectators at the Moonah indoor cricket centre. About midnight the defendant decided to go home. She had met the plaintiff on a previous occasion and, as they both lived in Johnston Street Moonah, a short distance away, offered him a lift home in her Ford Cortina sedan. The defendant said that as she turned left from Main Road into Johnston Street she took the corner wide and then realised that she had been driving without her lights on. She turned the lights on and came back to the correct side of the road. As she did so she saw a flat tray truck parked on its correct side of the road immediately in front of her but was unable to avoid a collision with the rear of this vehicle. The plaintiff has no memory of the events between shortly prior to leaving the cricket centre and the 24 July 1984 when he found himself in hospital and was informed that he had been in an accident.

The defendant's account was substantially corroborated by Miss Julie Parish who was sitting in her parked car outside her home in Johnston Street, almost directly opposite the stationary truck. I accept Miss Parish's evidence as an accurate account of the events leading up to the accident and find that the flat tray wood truck was parked close to and parallel to the gutter some five or six houses from the junction of Main Road Moonah and Johnston Street, facing the direction in which the defendant was travelling. The defendant's car went onto the wrong side of the road as it turned the corner from Main Road. It had no lights on. It then came back onto its correct side of the road and the headlights were switched on. By this time, it was close to the rear of the parked truck. The defendant's car then turned back towards the centre of the road but failed to avoid the tray of the truck. The left hand side of the defendant's car was driven under the rear of the tray of the truck and the plaintiff sustained substantial head injuries. Miss Parish estimated that the defendant's speed along Johnston Street was in the order of twenty miles per hour. She said that it did not appear to brake or slow down before the impact.

Senior Constable Leigh attended the scene of the accident at about 12.25am. I accept his evidence that the force of the impact between the defendant's car…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Sorenson v Woolnough

Details

AGLC: Sorenson v Woolnough [1989] TASSC 36
Case: [1989] TASSC 36
Decision Date: 23 August 1989

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Sorenson v Woolnough, heard in the Supreme Court of Tasmania, involved a claim for damages due to alleged negligent driving. The plaintiff, Sorenson, sought compensation for injuries sustained in a car accident caused by the defendant, Woolnough. The incident occurred when Woolnough, driving without her headlights on, collided with a stationary truck on Johnston Street. Sorenson, a passenger in the car, suffered severe head injuries and other physical and psychological impairments as a result.

The court examined whether Woolnough was negligent in failing to use her headlights and whether Sorenson's injuries were exacerbated by his failure to wear a seat belt or warn Woolnough about her driving conditions. The evidence suggested that Woolnough's negligence in not using her headlights contributed to the accident, but Sorenson's failure to wear a seat belt did not mitigate his injuries. The court found that Sorenson's frontal lobe damage, hearing loss, neck pain, and other impairments significantly affected his life, diminishing his capacity to work and reducing his earning potential.

Considering Sorenson's pre-accident lifestyle and work history, the court assessed his damages for past and future loss of earning capacity, pain and suffering, and medical expenses. The total awarded was $186,700, reflecting the severe and lasting impact of the injuries on Sorenson's life and future prospects.

Orders