Sangha v Baxter

(2009) 52 MVR 492; [2009] NSWCA 78

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Appeal
2. › General principles
3. › Interference with judge's findings of fact
4. › Functions of appellate court
5. › Findings on issue of negligence
6. › Where findings based on credibility of witnesses
7. › Where findings clearly wrong
1. Tort Law
2. › Negligence
3. › Motor vehicle accident
4. › Taxi driver reversing into passenger
5. › Whether acts causing injury were carried out in self-defence
6. › Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), s 52
1. Tort Law
2. › Intentional torts
3. › Trespass to the person
4. › Distinction between assault and battery
5. › Whether contributory negligence available as defence to intentional tort
1. Tort Law
2. › Self-defence
3. › Statutory defence
4. › Whether subjective belief in necessity of conduct can be inferred from circumstances
5. › Whether direct evidence of perceptions required
6. › Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), s 52(2)

Quick Take

A trial judge who rejects a witness's evidence in its entirety must still consider whether parts of that evidence are corroborated by independent witnesses whose evidence is accepted; wholesale rejection without such consideration may constitute error warranting appellate intervention. The statutory defence of self-defence under s 52 of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) does not require the person whose conduct is in question to give direct evidence of their subjective perceptions; such perceptions may be inferred from the circumstances. Whether contributory negligence is available as a defence to an intentional tort causing injury remains doubtful.