Dojcinoski v Aleksovski

Link copied
Case Copied 58 min read

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:

Dojcinoski v Aleksovski & Anor

Citation:

[2015] ACTSC 357

Hearing Dates:

13, 14, 15 and 16 July 2015

DecisionDate:

18 November 2015

Before:

Mossop AsJ

Decision:

See [181]

Catchwords:

PERSONAL INJURY – Injury sustained as front seat passenger in single motor vehicle accident – liability admitted – assessment of damages – self-employed painter – reliance on contemporaneous records of treating general practitioner and treating psychologist – no issue of principle

Legislation Cited:

Civil Law (Wrongs) Act 2002 (ACT) s 45

Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT)

Cases Cited:

Pangallo v Smith [2015] ACTSC 313

Parties:

Ilo Dojcinoski (Plaintiff)

Trajce Aleksovski (First Defendant)

Insurance Australia Limited trading as NRMA Insurance (Second Defendant)

Representation:

Counsel

Mr A Bartley SC and Mr F Tuscano (Plaintiff)

Mr J Pappas (First and Second Defendants)

Solicitors

Ken Cush & Associates (Plaintiff)

Moray & Agnew (First and Second Defendants)

File Number:

SC 43 of 2013

Introduction

  1. The plaintiff was involved in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on Kuringa Drive in Fraser in the Australian Capital Territory on 13 February 2010 when the car driven by the first defendant ran off the road and hit a tree.  Liability was admitted and the hearing involved an assessment of damages.

The plaintiff prior to the accident

  1. The plaintiff was born in 1979 and was 35 years old at the time of the hearing.  He was born in Canberra.  Both parents had migrated from Macedonia.  He lived with his family in Kaleen.  He went to primary and secondary schools up to year 10 in Kaleen.  He attended Dickson College but left halfway through year 12.

  1. After he left school he was employed as a painter by Canberra Homes.  He had obtained that employment through a friend of his brother.  He was trained on-the-job.  The work that he did involved the painting of new homes.  He stayed in that employment for around 12 months.  He next worked for Kenro Services doing painting.  That involved repainting houses and painting of extensions to houses.  He also worked for other contract painters at that time.

  1. In 1998 he was involved in a car accident in Braddon or Ainslie.

  1. In order to save money he also worked as a cleaner at night for an entity referred to as Rose Cleaning.  He worked there for three to six months.  While working for Rose Cleaning he suffered an injury to his right knee and back.  He received workers’ compensation for the period that he was off work.  He also worked as a security officer for Group 4 for a period of two to three years doing security screening at the Canberra Airport.  In 1999 he had another car accident in Braddon where a police car side swiped the vehicle that he was driving.

  1. In June 1999 his right knee was injured in a shop when a picture frame fell off the rack and onto his knee.  He was off work for around six months.  He then worked for…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Dojcinoski v Aleksovski and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2015] ACTSC 357
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Federal Court of Australia, Dojcinoski, the plaintiff, sued Aleksovski, the defendant, for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident where Dojcinoski was the front seat passenger. Aleksovski admitted liability for the accident, but the court needed to determine the appropriate amount of damages for the injuries sustained by Dojcinoski. Dojcinoski, a self-employed painter, contended that the injuries substantially impaired his capacity to work and affected his mental health. The primary issue for the court was the quantification of damages, focusing on both physical and psychological injuries, as well as their impact on Dojcinoski’s ability to earn an income.

The court assessed damages by examining contemporaneous records from Dojcinoski’s treating general practitioner and psychologist. It considered the nature and extent of the injuries, their impact on his capacity to work, and the loss of income as a self-employed painter. The court relied on the detailed records and expert evidence to evaluate the long-term effects of the injuries and the reasonable future medical expenses. There was no dispute regarding the principles to be applied in determining the damages, allowing the court to focus on the factual matrix presented.

The court found that Dojcinoski's injuries had a significant impact on his physical and psychological well-being, resulting in a considerable loss of earning capacity. The court awarded damages that reflected the full extent of Dojcinoski’s injuries and their impact on his life. The assessment included compensation for pain and suffering, loss of earnings, and future medical expenses. The court determined the award based on the evidence presented, ensuring that the damages reflected the true extent of Dojcinoski’s injuries and their consequences.

The final orders included compensation for past and future pain and suffering, loss of earnings, and future medical expenses. The court ordered Aleksovski to pay the full amount of damages as determined. The decision underscored the importance of detailed contemporaneous records and expert evidence in assessing damages for personal injuries.

Orders

Orders of the court

See [181]

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.