The Probability Theory in Slipping Cases: before Strong v Woolworths and beyond
In this paper, Peter Hamilton surveys the caselaw on causation in slipping cases. He illustrates how courts use ‘probabilistic reasoning’ to fill gaps in evidence about the timing of spills before an incident and how this is often used by plaintiffs to establish liability, even though there may be no evidence at all about when the spill occurred. The paper covers the leading decision of Strong v Woolworths, but explores its origins and how it has been applied more recently, ending with tips for practitioners on evidence gathering.
Public Liability Team Leader at Zaparas Lawyers
4 年Great article Peter Hamilton well worth the read! I’d be interested to see how the courts would consider this when posed with competing submissions re independent variables (i.e each prior minute has the same probability of a spill occurring)
Barrister at the Victorian Bar
4 年Jenny Tran relevant to our case yesterday. Thanks for sharing Peter.
Principal Lawyer at Maurice Blackburn Lawyers Accredited Specialist Personal Injury Law
4 年Great analysis Peter!? So glad I briefed you for our recent case- my client will be forever grateful for you daring to take on her case against the big corporations and us getting her a successful jury verdict:)
Senior Legal Counsel, Medical Negligence at Slater and Gordon Lawyers
4 年Trang van Heugten (née Tran) -this reminds me of our discussions prior to your trial. :)