{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Roads and Traffic Authority v Royal
Download as PDF
Download as Word
Highlights
My Notes
Collections
Create a New Collection
Overview
Full Text
{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Details
Case
Agency Issuance Number
Published Date
Roads and Traffic Authority v Royal
[2008] HCA 19
Tags
No tags available
Case
Roads and Traffic Authority v Royal
[2008] HCA 19
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGUMMOW, KIRBY, HAYNE, HEYDON AND KIEFEL JJROADS AND TRAFFIC AUTHORITY APPELLANTANDGRANT ROYAL & ANOR RESPONDENTSRoads and Traffic Authority v Royal[2008] HCA 1914 May 2008S517/2007ORDER1. Appeal allowed with costs.2. Set aside the orders of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales made on 4 April 2007 as varied by the further order made by consent on 1 August 2007, and in their place order that the appeal to that Court be dismissed with costs.On appeal from the Supreme Court of New South WalesRepresentationJ E Maconachie QC with T F McKenzie for the appellant (instructed by McCabe Terrill Lawyers)S J Harben SC with S B Lowe for the first respondent (instructed by Rankin & Nathan Lawyers)Submitting appearance for the second respondentNotice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSRoads and Traffic Authority v RoyalTorts – Causation – Motor vehicle accident – Whether design of intersection a cause of the accident.Negligence – Causation of damage at common law – Causation in fact – Whether multiple causes of damage exist – Whether highway construction and design a material contribution to collision – Whether foreseeable risk of harm to persons such as the plaintiff – "But for" test in causation – Considerations relevant to deciding contested questions of causation – Whether correct approach taken to question of causation by Court of Appeal in reversing conclusion of primary judge – Whether existence of Law Reform...
Continue reading the full case
Tags
No tags available
Case
Roads and Traffic Authority v Royal
[2008] HCA 19
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGUMMOW, KIRBY, HAYNE, HEYDON AND KIEFEL JJROADS AND TRAFFIC AUTHORITY APPELLANTANDGRANT ROYAL & ANOR RESPONDENTSRoads and Traffic Authority v Royal[2008] HCA 1914 May 2008S517/2007ORDER1. Appeal allowed with costs.2. Set aside the orders of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales made on 4 April 2007 as varied by the further order made by consent on 1 August 2007, and in their place order that the appeal to that Court be dismissed with costs.On appeal from the Supreme Court of New South WalesRepresentationJ E Maconachie QC with T F McKenzie for the appellant (instructed by McCabe Terrill Lawyers)S J Harben SC with S B Lowe for the first respondent (instructed by Rankin & Nathan Lawyers)Submitting appearance for the second respondentNotice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSRoads and Traffic Authority v RoyalTorts – Causation – Motor vehicle accident – Whether design of intersection a cause of the accident.Negligence – Causation of damage at common law – Causation in fact – Whether multiple causes of damage exist – Whether highway construction and design a material contribution to collision – Whether foreseeable risk of harm to persons such as the plaintiff – "But for" test in causation – Considerations relevant to deciding contested questions of causation – Whether correct approach taken to question of causation by Court of Appeal in reversing conclusion of primary judge – Whether existence of Law Reform...
showFlash = false, 6000)"
>