Court of Appeal (Qld)|2001-06-22|Before: McMurdo P, McPherson JA, Moynihan JSeparate reasons for judgment of, each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made
McMurdo P, McPherson JA, Moynihan JSeparate reasons for judgment of, each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made
Catchwords
TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – ESSENTIALS OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE
– DUTY OF CARE – REASONABLE FORESEEABILITY OF DAMAGE
–
PARTICULAR CASES – OTHER PARTICULAR CASES – UNSOUNDNESS OF MIND
Source
Original judgment source is linked above.
Catchwords
TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – ESSENTIALS OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE– DUTY OF CARE – REASONABLE FORESEEABILITY OF DAMAGE–PARTICULAR CASES – OTHER PARTICULAR CASES – UNSOUNDNESS OF MIND– whether person of unsound mind is atcommon law capable of being legallyliable in negligence for conduct that causes injury and loss to another –whether the appellant’sact was “calculated” in the ordinarysense to cause harmTORTS – NEGLIGENCE – ESSENTIALS OF ACTIONFOR NEGLIGENCE – STANDARD OF CARE – PARTICULAR PERSONS ANDSITUATIONS– whether a person of unsound mind is to be judged by thestandard of the ordinary and reasonable person.Criminal Code, s27Mental Health Act 1974 (Qld), Part 4Supreme Court Act1995 (Qld), s 253Adamson v Motor Vehicle Insurance Trust[1957] WALawRp 1(1957) 58 WALR 56, consideredBunyan v Jordan [1936] NSWStRp 26(1936) 36 SR(NSW) 350,appliedBunyan v Jordan [1937] HCA 5
(1937) 57 CLR 1, consideredCook v
Cook [1986] HCA 73
(1986) 162 CLR 376, consideredElford v FAI General Insurance
Company Limited [1994] 1 Qd R 258, appliedJaensch v Coffey [1984] HCA 52
(1984)
155 CLR 549, consideredMcHale v Watson [1964] HCA 64
(1964) 111 CLR 384,
consideredMcHale v Watson [1966] HCA 13
(1966) 115 CLR 199,
consideredMorriss v Marsden [1952] 1 All ER 925,
consideredNorthern Territory v Mengel (1995) 185 CLR 307,
appliedVictorian Railways Commissioners v Coultas (1888) 13 App Cas
222, distinguishedWhite v White [1949] 2 All ER 339,
consideredWilkinson v Downton [1897] 2 QB 57, applied
Judgment (15 paragraphs)
[1]
TORTS - NEGLIGENCE - ESSENTIALS OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE - DUTY OF CARE - REASONABLE FORESEEABILITY OF DAMAGE - PARTICULAR CASES - OTHER PARTICULAR CASES - UNSOUNDNESS OF MIND - whether person of unsound mind is at common law capable of being legally liable in negligence for conduct that causes injury and loss to another - whether the appellant's act was "calculated" in the ordinary sense to cause harm
[2]
TORTS - NEGLIGENCE - ESSENTIALS OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE - STANDARD OF CARE - PARTICULAR PERSONS AND SITUATIONS - whether a person of unsound mind is to be judged by the standard of the ordinary and reasonable person.