Cavric v Willoughby City Council

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Cavric v Willoughby City Council [2014] NSWDC 46
Hearing dates:	28/04/2014 - 01/05/2014
Decision date:	07 May 2014
Jurisdiction:	Civil
Before:	Elkaim SC DCJ
Decision:	Judgment for the defendant
Catchwords:	Pedestrian accident in car park. Definition of public road.
Legislation Cited:	Civil Liability Act 2002 Roads Act 1993 Local Government Act 1993
Cases Cited:	Blacktown City Council v Hocking [2008] NSWCA 144 Botany Bay City Council v Latham [2013] NSWCA 363 North Sydney Council v Roman [2007] NSWCA 27 Stojan (No 9) Pty Ltd v Kenway [2009] NSWCA 364
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Despina Cavric (Plaintiff) Willoughby City Council (Defendant)
Representation:	K Andrews (Plaintiff) R Gambi (Defendant) NSW Compensation Lawyers (Plaintiff) Mills Oakley Lawyers (Defendant)
File Number(s):	2012/00383072
Publication restriction:	No

Judgment

1. The plaintiff was born in 1974. In 2011 she was injured while pushing a shopping trolley within a car park owned by the defendant. She says her injuries were caused by the defendant's negligence. She has sued for damages.

1. The defendant, a local council, has denied liability and raised a number of defences provided by the Civil Liability Act 2002 (the "CLA"). The defendant also disputes the nature and extent of the plaintiff's injuries.

1. Both liability and the assessment of damages are governed by the CLA.

The plaintiff's background

1. This is generally set out in the chronology (Exhibit K). The plaintiff was married in 2004. In 2006 the plaintiff went on maternity leave to have her first child. He was born in June 2006. Her second child, another boy, was born in August 2007 and a third, a girl, in August 2009.

1. The plaintiff lives in a large home in Northbridge. It has five bedrooms and four bathrooms. As at June 2011 the plaintiff was cleaning the whole of the house, doing all the shopping, cooking, washing and ironing and even some gardening. Her husband, Ned, managed to fit in lawnmowing as his contribution. His parents own the Northbridge house. They rent and live in a property nearby. They occasionally helped with the children but not with domestic activities.

1. Mr Ned Cavric is an only child. Mr Cavric's occupation was a little hard to pin down. According to the plaintiff he was on the board of a mining company, was a property developer and provided consultancy services in marketing to her solicitors, NSW Compensation Lawyers. The last area of occupation is contradicted by Exhibit 6. The evidence in relation to the use of credit cards by the plaintiff and her husband was, at least, baffling. I had the distinct impression that there were issues concerning the plaintiff's husband that were not being disclosed. They were not however issues that were relevant to the plaintiff's claim although her obvious guarding about her husband did not assist her credit.

1. Following the birth of her third child the plaintiff returned to part time work and was teaching at Liverpool Boys High School for three days a week. She hoped to…