« We’re free. Really. | Main | Judicial smack-down on cameras in courts »
A victory for the Berrymans?
By Steven | May 6, 2008
You will have heard that Justice Mallon has granted judicial review of the coroner’s ruling in the Berryman’s bridge collapse case. Here are some things you might think you know about the Berryman case from the media coverage:
- The Berrymans “won” the case
- The decision said the bridge collapse was “not their fault”
- The Berrymans were “cleared of blame” for the collapse
- It was faulty army workmanship that caused the collapse
- The decision quashed the finding that the Berrymans were responsible for the collapse of the bridge and the death of Kenneth Richards
It makes a nice story, and I have no doubt it’s the way lawyer Rob Moodie would like it told. But it’s not really what the judge said. You can check out the decision, or just cut to the media summary.
Actually, it wasn’t entirely a win for the Berrymans. They sought a new inquest. They didn’t get it. They wanted judicial review of the Army’s decisions and conduct. They didn’t get that either. They failed on most of the grounds on which they sought to challenge the coroner’s findings.
In fact, they really only succeeded on one point: quashing the coroner’s finding that there was no issue with the design or construction of the bridge by the Army. Bits of the coroner’s decision were struck out to make this change.
Does this absolve the Berrymans of blame? No. The judge considered doing that, but found that there was evidence before the coroner upon which he was entitled to find that the Berrymans had inaquately maintained the bridge, quite apart from the problems with its design and construction. She said that, even considering what we know now, it is unlikely that the Berrymans could be completely exonerated.
Does it mean the Army was at fault? Not necessarily. The judge made no finding about fault or wrongful conduct on the part of the Army. She merely struck out the parts of the decision that confidently concluded that the Army wasn’t at fault.
The coroner had concluded that the collapse was primarily the Berrymans’ fault. The judge effectively amended that to partly their fault.
We shouldn’t be too surprised at this result. It’s exactly what Wild J said when he considered similar issues in an early chapter of the litigation.
And although Rob Moodie makes a lot of the judge’s recommendation that the parties try to settle the Berrymans’ $4.5 million damages claim, Justice Mallon didn’t make any comments on the merits of the claim, which is a separate proceeding.
The Berrymans gained a partial victory in the court. But they won a striking victory in the media.
Topics: Media ethics | Comments Off on A victory for the Berrymans?