Walker v Symonds & Anor [2014] QCA 148
Holmes JA, Atkinson and Dalton JJ considered an Appeal from the District Court.
The Appellant Plaintiff sought leave to appeal a judgment dismissing her claim for personal injuries caused when she came into collision with a car. The collision occurred at a roundabout controlled intersection where the Plaintiff was a pedestrian. The only witnesses to the collision were the Plaintiff and the First Defendant. The Trial Judge, having determined that both seemed honest in giving their evidence, was faced with a considerable conflict in the evidence.
Dalton J, with Holmes JA and Atkinson J agreeing, was of the opinion that the Trial Judge had given adequate reasons for the finding that the Appellant was mistaken about the angle of the wheels of the respondent’s car. However, the remainder of conclusions as to the facts of the matter were not explained by proper reasons. Further, the Court of Appeal could not determine liability on appeal, as the Court was not in a position to determine whether the indicator was on, whether there was a conversation between the parties about the indicator or whether an apology was made.
Accordingly, a new trial was ordered with respect to both quantum and liability.
