Covington-Thomas v Cth of Australia [No 2]

The case of Covington-Thomas v Cth of Australia [No 2] involved a claim for damages arising from the collision between the Australian frigate HMAS Melbourne and the New Zealand frigate HMNZS Voyager. The plaintiff, Covington-Thomas, sought compensation for injuries sustained in the incident, and a verdict was entered in their favour on 2 August 2007. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate amount of damages to be awarded, and it was found that there had been an error in the initial calculation. The matter before the court was whether the error could be corrected under the slip rule and the appropriate discount, if any, that should be applied to the damages. Specifically, the court needed to consider the discount under the principles set out in Malec v J C Hutton P/L, as well as the different methods of computation for the loss of pension and superannuation rights, and whether there should be a discount for reduced life expectancy.

The court considered the principles established in Malec v J C Hutton P/L, which held that where a person has been found liable for purely economic loss, the damages awarded should be reduced by a percentage reflecting the risk that the loss may not have been suffered by the plaintiff. The court noted that in this case, the error in the calculation of damages did not relate to economic loss, but rather to the calculation of damages for personal injury. The court found that the error could be corrected under the slip rule, as it was an obvious and clerical mistake that did not require the introduction of fresh evidence. Additionally, the court held that there should be no discount for reduced life expectancy, as the injury did not affect the plaintiff's longevity.

In light of the above, the court ordered that the error in the calculation of damages be corrected, and that no discount be applied for reduced life expectancy. The court also noted that the appropriate method of computation for the loss of pension and superannuation rights should be determined based on the specific circumstances of the case. The final orders of the court reflected these findings, and the plaintiff was awarded the appropriate amount of damages, taking into account the corrected calculation and the absence of a discount for reduced life expectancy.