Allianz Australia Insurance Limited v Manrique
[2024] NSWPIC 692
•11 December 2024
| CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER | |
| CITATION: | Allianz Australia Insurance Limited v Manrique [2024] NSWPIC 692 |
| CLAIMANT: | Joaquin Aragon Manrique |
| INSURER: | Allianz |
| MEMBER: | Hugh Macken |
| DATE OF DECISION: | 11 December 2024 |
| CATCHWORDS: | MOTOR ACCIDENTS - Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; settlement approval; section 6.23; fracture at the base of the thumb; ligamentous tear at the first metacarpal joint; good recovery from physical injuries; onset of post-traumatic stress disorder; major depressive disorder in remission; symptoms of low mood; loss of motivation; claimant greatly improved and managing psychological symptoms; maintaining continuous employment; no reasonable prospects of exceeding 10% WPI; past economic loss; more than adequate allowance for economic loss; future economic loss buffer; significantly improved mental state; Held – settlement approved. |
| DETERMINATIONS MADE: | CERTIFICATE SETTLEMENT APPROVAL Issued under section 6.23 of the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017 The amount of the claim for damages is approved in the total amount of $100,000. |
STATEMENT OF REASONS
INTRODUCTION
Joaquin Manrique (the claimant) is a 27-year-old man who was injured in a motor vehicle accident on 7 September 2020. He was a front seat passenger in a vehicle driven by his then girlfriend when the insured driver turned right across their path and a collision ensued.
The claimant attended his general practitioner on the same day and noted cervical pain and pain to his right hand and wrist. He was diagnosed with a fracture at the base of the thumb as well as ligamentous tears at the first metacarpal joint of his right hand.
The parties agreed that he had sustained non-threshold injury.
Physically the claimant has made a good recovery. He has some ongoing pain in the right hand and right wrist. That said, he has been able to return to relatively heavy physical activities and I note he is working in Banff, a ski resort in Canada, as a Barista and regularly skiing as time and conditions allow.
More relevantly the claimant also suffered some significant psychological sequalae which, to a large extent, arise from the sequalae of the motor vehicle accident. He has been under the ongoing care of a psychologist, John Murphy, who he was continuing to see prior to his departure from Australia. He has attended a psychiatrist, Dr Ravindran, and has been prescribed anti-depressant medication. The claimant noted that whilst a year or two ago he was suffering significant post-traumatic stress disorder and a major depressive disorder with the associated symptoms of low mood, loss of motivation and suicidal ideations, he is now, as he says, greatly improved and managing his psychological symptoms.
The claimant was examined by Dr Ashvinder Anand who, in a report dated 6 August 2024, identified a whole person impairment of 3% consequent on the motor vehicle accident. This noted that he is able to self-care independently, which I note he is doing very effectively whilst living in Canada. It noted some impairment on social and recreational activities and some impairment on functioning.
The claimant has maintained continuous employment since the accident. He has completed a Bachelors Degree in June 2024. He has travelled overseas and is indeed currently working overseas, he has a stable home life with his parents and younger sibling in Australia when he returns and seemingly recovered from any accident related psychological symptoms such as a depressive disorder and the anxiety disorder which previously troubled him.
Noting these matters I do not consider that there is any reasonable prospect that the claimant being found to have either a physical or psychological injury which exceeds 10% whole person impairment.
The parties have agreed of an allowance for past economic loss of $9,000 noting that, whilst the claimant continued to work, there was an incapacity for approximately 2 months and that the claimant was earning $953.04 per week. This would give rise to a past wage loss in the order of $7,600 which, when superannuation is added and is rounded up, it makes an allowance for $9,000 from which the sum of $103.65 is to be deducted for past wages paid by the insurer. This is a more than adequate allowance for past economic loss on any view of it.
The parties have agreed future economic loss ought to be allowed in the sum of $91,000. This makes an allowance of one day off a month for the next 40 years giving rise to a figure of in the order of $71,000 to which is added a buffer of $20,000 should there be any future surgical procedures required by the claimant. I note there is no material to support any contention that the claimant will require surgical procedures but the allowance has still been made and agreed between the parties.
I have absolutely no hesitation in concluding that an allowance of $91,000 for future economic loss more than adequately provides for any possible wage loss or impaired earning capacity which the claimant may suffer in the future.
At the telephone conference the claimant presented as a very fit and capable individual. He has managed his physical injuries very effectively and is currently pursuing a long-held ambition of spending a winter in a North American Skii field to pursue his love of skiing and snow sports. He has advised that he has made friends where he lives. Physically, he has made a very good recovery from his injuries. More importantly, he has significantly improved his state of mental health and showed courage and maturity in dealing with the difficulties life has presented to him both in respect to the sequalae of this accident as well as relationship complications which have arisen since the accident.
Noting the above, it follows that I have no hesitation in approving the proposed settlement of $100,000. I note the insurer is have a credit of $103,065 for weekly payments made pursuant to section 3.40 (1) of the Motor Accident Injuries Act.
0
0
0