Vilips v Watkins

The applicant, Mr Vilips, sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia against decisions of the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The dispute concerned an intersection motor vehicle collision between Mr Vilips, a motorcyclist, and the respondent, Ms Watkins. Both the trial judge and the Full Court of the Supreme Court had found Mr Vilips solely responsible for the accident.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether special leave to appeal should be granted in the interests of the administration of justice, specifically concerning the proper determination of causation. The applicant argued that neither the trial judge nor the Full Court had adequately considered the true issue of causation, thereby denying him a proper trial and appeal. He contended that both courts had acted in disregard of established legal principles.

The applicant's submission highlighted that he had the right of way, while the respondent was facing a stop sign. The collision occurred slightly to the left of the respondent's perspective within the intersection. Despite findings that the applicant's speed was grossly excessive (90-100 km/h in a 60 km/h zone) and that he momentarily glanced at his rear-vision mirror, the applicant argued that the respondent's own accepted evidence laid the groundwork for a finding in his favour, which was not properly considered. The respondent testified that she stopped at the stop sign, observed a bus and children pass, looked both ways believing the intersection was clear, and proceeded slowly, being positive she had looked to her right and not seen the applicant.