The question on appeal from a jury verdict is whether the circumstances amounted to sufficient evidence to go to the jury; it is not a question of what the jury ought to do, or what inference a judge would draw, but what is sufficient for a jury to act upon.
Practitioners acting for plaintiffs injured by defective premises or equipment under the defendant's control should note that proof of the unexpected accident alone, without more, is sufficient to establish a prima facie case of negligence and carry the case to the jury, placing a practical (though not legal) onus on the defendant to explain.
No headnote yet — we'll generate the full structured AI headnote for you.
Generate the headnoteFree trial · no card required
Legal principles extracted from this case
Cases that have considered Griffith District Hospital v Hayes
Judicial Consideration (Chronological)