Vero Insurance Limited v Rail Corporation New South Wales

In *Vero Insurance Limited v Rail Corporation New South Wales*, the Court of Appeal of New South Wales considered an appeal concerning an insurance claim arising from a collision between a train and a car at a level crossing. The dispute involved Rail Corporation New South Wales (RailCorp) seeking to recover from Vero Insurance Limited, the insurer of the car owner, for damages sustained by RailCorp. The central question was whether the car owner/driver had incurred legal liability "as a result of an accident" within the meaning of the relevant insurance policy, and whether the car's placement in the path of the train was intentional or inadvertent.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the primary judge had erred in their findings of fact, particularly regarding the intentionality of the car's positioning. This involved a re-assessment of all the evidence presented to determine if the driver's actions constituted an "accident" for insurance purposes, or if they were deliberate acts that would exclude coverage.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal in part. It varied the primary judge's costs orders made in the Common Law Division and set aside one of those costs orders entirely. The appeal was otherwise dismissed, with specific directions regarding the costs of the appeal itself, allocating responsibility between the appellant and respondents based on particular grounds of appeal.