Whitley v Ryan; Whitley v Ryan

[2010] QSC 210

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Whitley v Ryan & Ors; Whitley v Ryan & Ors [2010] QSC 210

PARTIES:

MARION RUTH WHITLEY
(plaintiff)
v
DARREN MICHAEL RYAN
(first defendant)
VAN TRICHT ENTERPRISES PTY LTD
ABN 88 060 865 170
(second defendant)
SUNCORP GENERAL INSURANCE LIMITED
ACN 075 695 966
(third defendant)
NOMINAL DEFENDANT
(fourth defendant)

RAY DENNIS WHITLEY
(plaintiff)
v
DARREN MICHAEL RYAN
(first defendant)
VAN TRICHT ENTERPRISES PTY LTD
ABN 88 060 865 170
(second defendant)
SUNCORP GENERAL INSURANCE LIMITED
ACN 075 695 966
(third defendant)
NOMINAL DEFENDANT
(fourth defendant)

FILE NO/S:

S44 of 2009

S45 of 2009

DIVISION:

Trial

PROCEEDING:

Claim

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Toowoomba

DELIVERED ON:

4 June 2010

DELIVERED AT:

Toowoomba

HEARING DATE:

31 May; 1 - 4 June 2010

JUDGE:

Fryberg J

ORDERS:

For Matter S44/09:

1.   Judgment for compensatory damages for the plaintiff against the third defendant for $325,000.00 and costs to be assessed.

2.   Judgment for the fourth defendant against the third defendant on the notice claiming contribution given by the third defendant.

3.   Order the third defendant pay the fourth defendant’s costs of:

a.   the plaintiff’s claim for compensatory damages against the fourth defendant; and

b.   the third defendant’s notice claiming contribution against the fourth defendant.

4.   Further consideration of the plaintiff’s claim for exemplary damages against the first defendant adjourned to a date to be fixed.

For Matter S45/09:

1.   Judgment for compensatory damages for the plaintiff against the third defendant for $325,000.00 and costs to be assessed.

2.   Judgment for the fourth defendant against the third defendant on the notice claiming contribution given by the third defendant.

3.   Order the third defendant pay the fourth defendant’s costs of:

a.   the plaintiff’s claim for compensatory damages against the fourth defendant; and

b.   the third defendant’s notice claiming contribution against the fourth defendant.

4.   Further consideration of the plaintiff’s claim for exemplary damages against the first defendant adjourned to a date to be fixed.

CATCHWORDS:

Torts – Negligence – Road accident cases – Actions for negligence – Evidence – Other matters – Identification evidence – Consideration of conflicting witness evidence where liability is in dispute

Domican v The Queen (1992) 173 CLR 555; [1992] HCA 13, cited

COUNSEL:

M E Eliadis for the plaintiff
The first defendant appeared on his own behalf
No appearance for the second defendant
S C Williams QC, with T Matthews for the third defendant
R Dickson for the fourth defendant

M E Eliadis for the plaintiff
The first defendant appeared on his own behalf
No appearance for the second defendant
S C Williams QC, with T Matthews for the third defendant
R Dickson for the fourth defendant

SOLICITORS:

Shine Lawyers for the plaintiff
The first defendant appeared on his own behalf
No appearance for the second defendant
Bray Lawyers for the third defendant
Broadley Rees Hogan Lawyers for the fourth defendant

Shine Lawyers for the plaintiff
The first defendant appeared on his own behalf
No appearance for the second defendant
Bray Lawyers for the third defendant
Broadley Rees Hogan Lawyers for the fourth defendant