NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Appeal
CITATION: Telstra Corporation Ltd. v. Bisley [2005] NSWCA 128
HEARING DATE(S): 18 April 2005
JUDGMENT DATE: 22 April 2005
JUDGMENT OF: Handley JA at 1; Hodgson JA at 2; Bryson JA at 28
DECISION: Appeal dismissed with costs.
CATCHWORDS: TORT - Negligence - Public authority - Pit created by Telstra - Plaintiff falls into pit after cover removed - No evidence from Telstra as to placing or nature of cover - Whether inferences open that cover easily removable, and that warning signs should have been provided.
LEGISLATION CITED: Civil Liability Act 2002, ss.5B, 5C, 5D, 5E, 42
Nelson v. John Lysaght (Australia) Ltd. (1975) 132 CLR 201 CASES CITED: Rickards v. Australian Telecommunications Commission [1983] 2 NSWLR 155
Telstra Corporation Limited - appeallant PARTIES: Richard Glen Bisley - respondent
FILE NUMBER(S): CA 40343/04
Mr. G. Watson SC with Mr. N. Chen for appellant COUNSEL: Miss A. Katzmann SC with Mr. G. Rich for respondent
Henry Davis York, Sydney for appellant SOLICITORS: Merrick Spicer & Associates, Taree for respondent
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): DC 16/03
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Phegan DCJ
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL CA 40343/04 DC 16/03
HANDLEY JA HODGSON JA BRYSON JA
Friday 22 April 2005 TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED V. BISLEY Judgment 1 HANDLEY JA: I agree with Hodgson JA. 2 HODGSON JA: On 13 February 2004, Phegan DCJ gave his decision in proceedings brought by the respondent (Mr. Bisley) against the appellant (Telstra), to the effect that there should be judgment for Mr. Bisley in the sum of $75,000.00 plus certain medical expenses. Telstra has brought an appeal from that decision. It appears that a document entitled Consent Orders was filed, in which the respondent consented to an extension of time in which to file the Notice of Appeal, and consented to leave to appeal being granted. I would not consider that the filing of such a document satisfactorily overcomes the need to obtain leave for such an appeal, but in my opinion the convenient course in this case is simply to proceed to deal with the appeal on its merits.
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