Stone v The Owners - Units Plan 1214 and Ors

[2014] ACTCA 14

ACT Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Tort Law
2. › Negligence
3. › Personal injury
4. › Causation
5. › Circumstantial evidence
6. › Whether plaintiff proved injuries caused by fall rather than assault
7. › Burden of proof on plaintiff to establish mechanism of injury
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Pleadings
3. › Evidence at trial limited to case as pleaded
4. › Whether primary judge erred in excluding evidence inconsistent with particulars
5. › Late change of instructions
1. Appeal
2. › Appellate review of findings of fact
3. › Rehearing on the record
4. › Advantages of trial judge
5. › View of the scene
6. › Whether appellate court should disturb primary judge's factual findings
7. › Evidence Act 2011 (ACT), s 54
1. Evidence
2. › Expert evidence
3. › Conflicting expert opinions
4. › Forensic pathology
5. › Whether primary judge entitled to prefer one expert over another

Quick Take

A plaintiff in a personal injury case who has provided particulars stating no recollection of events cannot, without repleading, give evidence at trial of new recollections that depart from the case as pleaded. Where such evidence is excluded, a plaintiff's case based on circumstantial evidence of a fall must fail if there is no evidence from which it can be properly inferred that the fall was caused by the defendant's negligence, as distinct from mere speculation about how the plaintiff came to be at the point of the fall.