NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Appeal
CITATION: Taheer v Australian Associated Motor Insurers Ltd (trading as AAMI) [2010] NSWCA 191 This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.
HEARING DATE(S): 22 February 2009
JUDGMENT DATE: 12 August 2010
JUDGMENT OF: Beazley JA at 1; Giles JA at 10; Harrison J at 105
DECISION: (1) Appeal dismissed in relation to contributory negligence but allowed in relation to assessment of damages; (2) Set aside the verdict and judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $160,132.42 and the orders for costs given and made on 13 February 2009; (3) Order that there be a new trial limited to assessment of damages; (4) Order that the costs of the trial be in the disposal of the judge conducting the new trial; (5) Order that the respondent pay the appellant's costs of the appeal.
CATCHWORDS: TORTS - negligence - contributory negligence - motor vehicle collision - whether judge imposed a higher standard of care than that of a reasonable person in position of appellant - no error shown - otherwise no error as to finding of contributory negligence or reduction of damages - APPEAL - civil - failure to give reasons - appellant not accepted as to extent of injury and consequences - no finding as to true extent and consequences - but damages awarded under various heads - bases for awards not ascertainable without findings - awards inconsistent - reasons inadequate - new trial as to damages
Astley v Austrust Ltd (1999) HCA 6; (1999) 197 CLR 1 Council of the City of Greater Taree v Wells [2010] NSWCA 147; Ghunaim v Bart [2004] NSWCA 28; (2004) Aust Torts Rep 81-731; Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298; Liftronic Pty Ltd v Unver [2001] HCA 24; (2001) 179 ALR; Nominal Defendant v Gardikiotis (1996) 186 CLR 49; CASES CITED: Podrebsersek v Australian Iron and Steel Pty Ltd (1997) 59 ALR 25; Pollard v RRR Corporation Pty Ltd [2009] NSWCA 110; Sibley v Kais (1967) 118 CLR 424; Stojan (No 9) Pty Ltd v Kenway [2009] NSWCA 364; Tarabay v Leite [2008] NSWCA 259; Tromp v Liddle (1941) 41 SR 108; Turkmani v Visvalingam [2009] NSWCA 211.
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