Debra Anne Roulston v Elizabeth Savage

Case

[2006] ACTSC 95


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Debra Anne Roulston v Elizabeth Savage [2006] ACTSC 95 [2006] ACTSC 95

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Debra Anne Roulston v Elizabeth Savage involves a claim for damages for personal injuries arising from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 11 December 2002. The plaintiff, Debra Anne Roulston, was a young woman working in the childcare industry when the accident happened. The defendant, Elizabeth Savage, collided with the rear of the plaintiff's vehicle, causing it to propel forward into the vehicle in front. Liability has been admitted, and the matter proceeded before the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory as an assessment of damages only.

The legal issues in this case revolve around the extent of the ongoing claims of disabling neck and back pain, the pre-existing condition of the plaintiff's back, and the impact of the accident on the plaintiff's ability to work and perform activities of daily living. The plaintiff argues that she has suffered ongoing pain and discomfort in the cervical and thoracic spine, while the defendant argues that the plaintiff's ongoing symptoms cannot entirely be attributed to the accident.

In the judgment, the court found that the plaintiff had sustained soft tissue injuries in the accident, which exacerbated a pre-existing propensity to back pain and actual back pain. However, the court also found that the plaintiff's expert witnesses had reported in the absence of any record of the prior history of back complaints, and that the most reliable report was that of the plaintiff's general practitioner. The court found that the plaintiff had suffered soft tissue injuries which exacerbated a pre-existing propensity to back pain and actual back pain in the manner described by her general practitioner.

The court awarded the plaintiff general damages in the amount of $16,000 for past injuries, generating interest of $1,208 and $4,000 for the future, amounting to a total award of $21,208. The court also awarded the plaintiff $15,000 for past economic loss, $3,000 for future economic loss, $1,000 for past gratuitous care limited only to the first six months following the accident, $1,470 for past out-of-pocket expenses, and $500 for future out-of-pocket expenses. This amounts to an award in the following terms: General damages - past $16,000.00, Past interest $ 1,208.00, General damages - future $ 4,000.00, Past economic loss $15,000.00, Future economic loss $ 3,000.00, Griffith v Kerkemeyer $ 1,000.00, Past out-of-pocket expenses $ 1,470.00, and Future out-of-pocket expenses $ 500.00, totaling $42,178.00.

The court ordered that there be judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $42,178. The parties may apply in relation to costs.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Civil Litigation & Procedure

  • Tort Law

Legal Concepts

  • Causation

  • Negligence

  • Compensatory Damages

  • Limitation Periods

  • Res Judicata

  • Admissibility of Evidence

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

14

Quartermaine v Giblett [2004] WASCA 34
Nick Zardo v Mate Ivancic [2003] ACTSC 32
Cases Cited

2

Statutory Material Cited

0

Griffiths v Kerkemeyer [1977] HCA 45