High Court of Australia
IN THE HIGH "COURT OF AUSTRALIA
ES AVS ne
JOHN--LYSAGHT--CAUSTRALIA}.PTY..LIMITD
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
ORIGIN AL
Judgment delivered at_SYDNEY on_ THURSDAY, 28th MARCH 1963
WM. Houston, Gort, Print, Melb,
PITSTAVAS
Ve Y. LIMIT
JOHN LYSAGHT
JUDGME SUDGMENT OF THE COURT DEL D_BY Mef TER! .
CORAM: M B Je KITTo J.
TAYLOR J. MENZIES J.
WINDEYER J.
PITSTAVAS
Ve
JOHN LYSAGHT (AUSTRAL. PTY MITED
We are all of the opinion that there was no evidence fit for the consideration of the jury on the issue of the alleged negligence of the respondent. The principles upon which the appeal depends are well established by the decisions. There is no feature in this case which calls for further discussion of those
principles. The appeal will therefore be dismissed with
costs.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate