Cho v Hui

Case [2023] QDC 155


DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Cho v Hui and Anor [2023] QDC 155

PARTIES:

KWON HYUN CHO
(plaintiff)

v

DAVID SINGEE HUI
(first defendant)

and

ALLIANZ AUSTRALIA INSURANCE LIMITED (ABN 15 000 122 850)
(second defendant)

FILE NO:

1873/22

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Civil

DELIVERED ON:

13 September 2023

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

27 and 28 April, 4 May and 12 September 2023 (written submissions dated 9 and 11 May 2023)

JUDGE:

Rosengren DCJ

ORDER:

JUDGMENT FOR THE PLAINTIFF IN THE SUM OF $55,505

CATCHWORDS:

DAMAGES – MEASURE OF DAMAGES – PERSONAL INJURIES – GENERAL DAMAGES – where the plaintiff suffered physical injuries in a motor vehicle accident – where liability is admitted by the defendants – whether the plaintiff was a witness of credit – where damages are assessed under the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) – where there is a dispute as to the consequences of the injuries caused by the accident – whether the plaintiff’s dominant injury is to his lower back – where the parties are in dispute as to the appropriate level of ISV

DAMAGES – MEASURE OF DAMAGES – PERSONAL INJURIES – LOSS OF EARNING CAPACITY – where the effect on employment in issue – whether the evidence justified an award of economic loss – the appropriate method of allowing a global component

Little v McCarthy & Anor [2014] QSC 274

Meechan v Savco Earthmoving Pty Ltd [2021] QCA 264
New South Wales v Moss [2000] NSWCA 133
Nilon v Bezzina [1988] 2 Qd R 420
Paff v Speed (1961) 105 CLR 549

Paul & Anor v Rendell (1981) 35 ALR 569
Perfect v MacDonald & Anor [2012] QSC 11

Qantas Airways Limited v Fisher [2014] QCA 329

Reardon-Smith v Allianz Australia Insurance Ltd [2007] QCA 211

Yammine v Kalwy [1979] 2 NSWLR 151

Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) s 51, 55, 60(1)(a), 60(3), 62
Civil Liability Regulation 2014 (Qld) s 6, Sch 4, Sch 7

COUNSEL:

R Green for the plaintiff
M Williams for the defendants

SOLICITORS:

Emmanuel Lawyers for the plaintiff
McInnes Wilson Lawyers for the defendants

Introduction

  1. In November 2020, the plaintiff and the first defendant were involved in a motor vehicle accident. The plaintiff claims he sustained injuries to his neck, shoulders and lower back.  In August last year, the plaintiff commenced this proceeding against the defendants for damages and other orders.  Liability has been admitted but quantum remains in dispute. The assessment is governed by the provisions of the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) (‘the Act’) and the Civil Liability Regulation 2014 (Qld) (‘the Regulation’).

  2. In April and May this year the trial was heard over three days.  The first language of the plaintiff and his wife is Korean.  They gave their evidence with the assistance of an interpreter.  The only other lay witness to give evidence was the first defendant.  Expert evidence was given by two orthopaedic surgeons, namely Drs Wallace and Fitzpatrick.  

  3. Detailed written submissions have been provided by the parties.  They were supplemented with oral…

Continue reading Cho v Hui

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Cho v Hui [2023] QDC 155
Case
[2023] QDC 155
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Cho v Hui, the plaintiff, Cho, sought damages for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. The defendants admitted liability, and the case proceeded to a trial concerning the measure of damages. The primary issues before the court were the assessment of general damages for the plaintiff's injuries and the determination of loss of earning capacity. The court needed to decide whether the plaintiff, Cho, was a credible witness and the extent of his injuries, specifically the impact on his lower back. Additionally, there was a dispute regarding the appropriate level of income-related special damages (ISV) and whether the evidence supported an award for economic loss.

The court examined the credibility of the plaintiff, Cho, and found him to be a witness of credit. The court concluded that the plaintiff's dominant injury was to his lower back. Regarding the level of ISV, the court determined that the plaintiff's evidence justified an award, applying a global component to account for the overall impact of the injuries on his life. The court awarded damages for general damages and loss of earning capacity, taking into account the evidence presented.

In assessing the measure of damages, the court concluded that the plaintiff was entitled to a total sum of $55,505. This amount included compensation for general damages and loss of earning capacity. The judgment provided a comprehensive assessment of the plaintiff's injuries and their consequences, ensuring that the plaintiff received appropriate compensation for his losses.

Orders

Orders of the court

JUDGMENT FOR THE PLAINTIFF IN THE SUM OF $55,505

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.