Amankwah v Leopold - [2004] WADC 201

AMANKWAH -v- LEOPOLD [2004] WADC 201

Last Update: 10/11/2004

AMANKWAH -v- LEOPOLD [2004] WADC 201
Jurisdiction:	DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2004] WADC 201
Case No:	CIV:805/2003	Heard:	16-18 DECEMBER 2003, 20-21 MAY 2004 & 1 JUNE 2004
Coram:	REYNOLDS DCJ	Delivered:	01/10/2004
Location:	PERTH	Supplementary Decision:
No of Pages:	45	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Damages assessed in the sum of $4,500
[Click here for Judgment in Adobe Acrobat Format ]

Parties:	GERALDINE STEPHANIE AMANKWAH RENEE LEOPOLD
Catchwords:	Damages Negligence Motor vehicle accident Personal injuries Assessment Headaches, neck and back injuries Pre-existing degeneration Plaintiff's reliability
Legislation:	Motor Vehicle (Third Party Insurance) Act 1943
Case References:	Graham v Baker (1961) 106 CLR 340 Hendrie v Rusli [2000] WASCA 249 Southgate v Waterford (1990) 21 NSWLR 427 Wylde v 'Arriaza, unreported, FCt SCt of WA; Library No 970359; 23 July 1997 North v Thompson [1971] WAR 103

JURISDICTION : DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CIVIL

LOCATION : PERTH CITATION : AMANKWAH -v- LEOPOLD [2004] WADC 201 CORAM : REYNOLDS DCJ HEARD : 16-18 DECEMBER 2003, 20-21 MAY 2004 & 1 JUNE 2004 DELIVERED : 1 OCTOBER 2004 FILE NO/S : CIV 805 of 2003 BETWEEN : GERALDINE STEPHANIE AMANKWAH

Plaintiff

AND

RENEE LEOPOLD

Defendant

Catchwords:

Damages - Negligence Motor vehicle accident - Personal injuries - Assessment - Headaches, neck and back injuries - Pre-existing degeneration - Plaintiff's reliability

Legislation:

Motor Vehicle (Third Party Insurance) Act 1943

Result:

Damages assessed in the sum of $4,500

(Page 2)

Representation:

Counsel:

Plaintiff : Mr A S Stavrianou

Defendant : Mr J R Brooksby

Solicitors:

Plaintiff : Simon Walters

Defendant : Greenland Brooksby

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Graham v Baker (1961) 106 CLR 340
Hendrie v Rusli [2000] WASCA 249
Southgate v Waterford (1990) 21 NSWLR 427
Wylde v 'Arriaza, unreported, FCt SCt of WA; Library No 970359; 23 July 1997

Case(s) also cited:

North v Thompson [1971] WAR 103

(Page 3)

REYNOLDS DCJ:

Introduction

1 The plaintiff was born on 12 February 1961 and is 43 years of age. She claims damages based on negligence by the defendant in relation to a motor vehicle collision which occurred on 4 May 2000 at Cannington ("the accident"). In particular the plaintiff alleges that she has suffered soft tissue injuries to her cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine resulting in a variety of symptoms. Damages are sought for loss of amenities and enjoyment of life, past and future economic loss, past and future medical expenses, and interest on past loss and expenses. Both before and since the accident the plaintiff has continued to work for the Police Department of Western Australia ("the Police Service").

2 The defendant admits that the accident was caused by her negligence. Accordingly, liability is not in issue and the matter is one of assessment of damages. By her defence the defendant denies that the plaintiff is entitled to any relief at all. The defendant has pleaded that if the plaintiff has any cervical, thoracic or lumbar spine injuries…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Amankwah v Leopold

Details

AGLC: AMANKWAH v LEOPOLD [2004] WADC 201
Case: [2004] WADC 201
Decision Date: 1 OCTOBER 2004

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Amankwah v Leopold, the plaintiff, Amankwah, sought damages from the defendant, Leopold, for personal injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. The dispute centred on the assessment of damages, with a particular focus on the extent to which the injuries were exacerbated by pre-existing conditions and the plaintiff's reliability in reporting his injuries. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The court was tasked with determining the appropriate quantum of damages, specifically considering the impact of pre-existing degeneration on the plaintiff's injuries and the plaintiff's credibility in reporting the severity and nature of his injuries. The court had to weigh the evidence presented regarding the plaintiff's pre-existing medical conditions, the extent of the injuries sustained in the accident, and the reliability of the plaintiff's accounts of his symptoms.

After considering the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, the court found that the plaintiff's injuries, including headaches, neck, and back injuries, were indeed exacerbated by the accident. However, the court also determined that the plaintiff's pre-existing degeneration significantly contributed to the severity of his symptoms. The court assessed the plaintiff's credibility and found that while he had suffered genuine injuries, his accounts of the intensity and duration of his symptoms were somewhat exaggerated. Consequently, the court awarded the plaintiff damages in the sum of $4,500, reflecting the overall impact of the accident on the plaintiff's condition, adjusted for the pre-existing degeneration and the plaintiff's reliability in reporting his injuries.

Orders

Orders of the court

Damages assessed in the sum of $4,500

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.