| BlueScope
Steel Ltd v Cartwright (NSWCA) – work injury damages – truck
accident - excessive speed – BlueScope Steel and insurer not liable – appeal
allowed
|
| Gardner
v Mattila (NTCA) – evidence – equity – dispute arising from
development of store and caravan park – appeal dismissed – cross-appeal allowed
|
| Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read) |
BlueScope Steel Ltd v
Cartwright
[2015] NSWCA 25
Court
of Appeal of New South Wales
Beazley
P; Ward & Emmett JJA
Work
injury damages - workers compensation - motor vehicle accident - employer
contracted with steel manufacturer for transport of steel in containers - truck
driver was driving prime mover with attached trailer containing heavy container
- truck driver claimed damages for injuries when trailer lurched and rolled -
Court held accident caused by tipping of unstable load and that both
manufacturer and employer breached duty of care to truck driver - manufacturer
had primary liability due to its inadequate packing system, which employer was
contractually required to follow - liability apportioned at 85% for steel
manufacturer - 15% for employer - held: accident would not have occurred unless
prime mover travelling at speed in excess of limit - truck driver failed to
establish inadequacy of wedges caused accident - truck driver entirely
responsible for injuries - appeal allowed.
BlueScope Steel Ltd
|
Gardner
v Mattila
[2015] NTCA 1
Court of Appeal of the Northern Territory
Kelly, Barr & Hiley JJ
Evidence - equity - parties entered lease
agreement to develop store and caravan park on land which respondent inherited
from father’s estate - development financed by sale of parcels of land which
respondent also inherited - parcels sold by first appellant using power of
attorney granted by respondent - respondent made various claims against first
appellant - primary judge found in favour of respondent on undue influence
claims, claims for misappropriation of money, negligent sale of land and claim
for declaration that lease was void - primary judge gave judgment for first
appellant on quantum meruit claim - parties appealed and cross-appealed - first
appellant’s essential complaint was that trial judge accepted respondent’s
submission that Mrs Gardner had lied in giving evidence - held: no reason why
trial judge ought not to have accepted respondent’s evidence - appeal dismissed
- cross appeal against first appellant concerning alleged breaches of duty in
relation to trust money spent on building works which were uncommercial
allowed.
Gardner
|
