In circumstantial negligence cases where the trial judge's findings rest on inferential reasoning from photographic and documentary evidence rather than witness credibility, an appellate court is in as good a position as the trial judge to draw inferences and will not be constrained by appellate restraint principles. Photographs should not be used by a trial judge to make findings of fact unsupported by other evidence; they should be taken together with all other evidence. A plaintiff in a road accident case must establish that the alleged defect in the road surface caused the accident as an inference more probable than other available possibilities — it is not sufficient to show that the defect created a foreseeable risk and the accident occurred within that area of risk.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 27 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 27 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.