Broadhurst v Del Pino

[2005] WASCA 82

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Adequacy of reasons
3. › Judicial duty to provide reasons for decision
4. › Failure to resolve conflicts of evidence
5. › Whether inadequacy of reasons constitutes error of law
6. › Whether appeal court can resolve matter itself where only one conclusion reasonably open
1. Tort Law
2. › Negligence
3. › Motor vehicle accident
4. › Causation
5. › Whether injury was accident related
6. › Delayed onset of symptoms
7. › Pre-existing degenerative condition rendered symptomatic by accident
1. Damages
2. › Personal injury
3. › Assessment of damages
4. › Past economic loss
5. › Future loss of earning capacity
6. › Whether reduced capacity for manual work
7. › Whether award outside range of sound discretionary assessment

Quick Take

Where a trial judge's reasons are inadequate but only one conclusion is reasonably open on the evidence, an appeal court may resolve the matter itself rather than remitting for retrial. In personal injury cases involving delayed onset of symptoms, causation may be established where the plaintiff had no pre-existing symptoms, the accident was serious, and the nature of the symptoms was within the area of foreseeable risk, even where the precise medical mechanism is disputed between experts.