BDT v BDG

[2019] QDC 74

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

BDT v BDG [2019] QDC 74

PARTIES:

BDT
(plaintiff)

and

BDG
(defendant)

FILE NO/S:

S11781/2017

DIVISION:

PROCEEDING:

Assessment of damages

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

10 May 2019

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

27 March 2019

JUDGE:

McGill SC, DCJ

ORDER:

Certify damages assessed at $972,812.91, including $349,778.41 by way of interest.         

CATCHWORDS:

DAMAGES – Psychiatric injuries – sexual assault – whether aggravated damages appropriate – assessment of economic loss – interest on past loss.

AP v Di Pino (No. 2) [2012] QDC 5 – considered.
Battiato v Lagana [1992] 2 Qd R 234 – cited.
Bird v Bool (Writ 815/95, 16 October 1997, Derrington J, unreported, BC 9705223) – considered.
Callinan v Borovina [1977] Qd R 366 – cited.
Camm v Salter [1992] 2 Qd R 342 – cited.
Clark v Ainsworth (1996) 40 NSWLR 463 – cited.
Davis & Anor v Bound & Anor [2011] QDC 82 – considered.
Fire and All Risks Insurance Co Ltd v Callinan (1978) 140 CLR 427 – cited.
Grieve v Gomez [2017] QDC 298 – considered.
Henry v Thompson [1989] 2 Qd R 412 – cited.
Jackson v Bagwell [1992] 2 Qd R 390 – cited.
K v G [2010] QSC 13 – considered.
Malec v JC Hutton Pty Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 638 – applied.
MBP (SA) Pty Ltd v Gogic (1991) 171 CLR 657 – cited.
P v R [2010] QSC 139 – considered.
Paten v Bale (Writ 8921/98, 19 October 1999, Wilson J, unreported, BC 9906872) – considered.
Richardson v Oracle Corporation Australia Pty Ltd [2014] FCAFC 82 – distinguished.
Schmidt v Argent [2003] QCA 507 – cited.
Seabrook v Allianz Aust. Insurance Ltd [2005] QCA 58 – cited.
WAQ v Di Pino [2012] QCA 283 – considered.
Webster v Yasso [2002] QDC 206 – considered.

COUNSEL:

H Blattman for the plaintiff
The defendant appeared in person

SOLICITORS:

Murphy Schmidt for the plaintiff
The defendant was not represented

1. This is an assessment of damages under a default judgment for damages to be assessed given by a registrar on 26 October 2018.  On 10 November 2017 the plaintiff filed a claim and statement of claim in the Supreme Court seeking damages for physical and psychological injury as a result of assault and battery of her by the defendant.  On 31 January 2018 default judgment was signed by a registrar, but that judgment was set aside on 24 August 2018 by Crow J.[1]  A further request for judgment was filed on 10 October 2018, resulting in the default judgment under which I am assessing damages.

   [1]I suspect this was associated with the defendant’s application for an extension of time within which to appeal against his conviction at his criminal trial.  The application was refused by the Court of Appeal on 21 February 2019: R v BDG [2019] QCA 24.

1. The assessment occurs in accordance with UCPR r 509. Notice of the hearing was served on the defendant, he was produced from custody…