Chirray v Christoforidis

[1966] NSWCA 1

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Chirray v Christoforidis [1966] NSWCA 1
Hearing dates:	8 February 1966
Decision date:	08 February 1966
Before:	Wallace P, Jacobs & Asprey JJA
Decision:	Appeal allowed
Legislation Cited:	Suitors Fund Act Supreme Court Act 1970 s160A
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Chirray Christoforidis
File Number(s):	15442/1961
Decision under appeal	Court or tribunal: Supreme Court of New South Wales Before: Taylor J

Judgment

1. WALLACE P: This is a motion for a new trial and for an order setting aside a verdict given by a jury before Taylor J. The only ground of appeal is that the damages awarded by the jury were excessive.

2. It appears that the plaintiff, who was a lady of about 58 years of age at the time of the trial in 1965, is a single woman who was employed In clerical duties by the Department of Taxation, and that as a pedestrian she was knocked down by the defendant's car in 1958. As a result of the accident she sustained the following injuries: multiple abrasions and lacerations, a severe laceration and haematoma of the left eyebrow, a fractured left lower rib and fractures of the right and lefts pubic bones. After the accident she was treated in hospital for about 52 days and on being discharged she remained at home for seven days, during which period she was unable to do her own household duties and had to be assisted from outside sources.

3. The fractures have all united satisfactorily, albeit in the case of the pelvic fracture there is some slight deformity, resulting in some tenderness which derives from interference with a nerve, but it does seem, although there are residual disabilities, that by and large the lady recovered well enough from the injuries. She sustains some disability in connexion with walking: although she does walk it makes her tired, and occasionally there is some loss of control of the left leg, but this does not last very long. She also has some pain in the head from time to time, but this intermittent pain does not appear to me to be of a very serious nature compared with instances that we see from time to time in more serious cases. The learned trial Judge himself described the case as of a somewhat modest nature compared with other cases that come before the Supreme Court. The jury awarded all her out-of-pocket expenses, including medical and hospital, and the cost of having her housekeeping done during her period of incapacity, and over and above such sum aggregating as it did £324.5.0, they awarded her £7,000 by way of general damages for pain and suffering, loss of amenities and so on. She has, it may be said, sustained some loss of amenities in that her walking disability probably prevents her from playing golf or swimming to any large extent, and perhaps dancing, in all of which activities she used to indulge.

4. Viewing the case as a whole and taking…