BHP Steel (JLA) Pty Ltd v Khan

The appeal concerned a personal injury claim brought by Mr Khan against BHP Steel (JLA) Pty Ltd. The dispute centred on the assessment of damages awarded to Mr Khan in the District Court. The appeal was heard by Giles and Hodgson JJA in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issue before the appellate court was whether the trial judge had erred in admitting and relying upon a judgment from other proceedings as evidence of what was said in those proceedings. Specifically, the court had to determine if the previous judgment was admissible for the purpose of proving the evidence given in that earlier trial, and if its admission and reliance vitiated the trial judge's findings on damages.

The court reasoned that the judgment from the other proceedings was not admissible for the purpose of proving the evidence that had been given in that earlier trial. While the judgment itself was admissible to prove that a judgment had been given, it was not evidence of the truth of the statements contained within it, nor of the evidence upon which it was based. As the trial judge had relied on this inadmissible evidence in making his findings regarding damages, those findings were vitiated.

Consequently, the appeal was allowed with costs. The verdict and judgment for the respondent were set aside, and the proceedings were remitted to the District Court for a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. The respondent was also granted a certificate under the Suitors Fund Act, provided they otherwise qualified.