Dorothy Vesna Skea v NRMA Insurance Limited ABN 11 000 016 722

The appellant, Dorothy Vesna Skea, brought a claim against NRMA Insurance Limited for damages arising from nervous shock. The dispute concerned the extent of compensable damage suffered by the appellant following her perception of the aftermath of an accident. The matter was heard on appeal.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the appellant had suffered a recognised psychiatric illness, whether her subsequent role as a carer for her injured husband and daughter constituted a *novus actus interveniens* that broke the chain of causation, and whether the trial judge had erred in discriminating between aspects of the injury caused by the initial shock and those aggravated by her role as carer. The court also considered the principles of remoteness of damage in the context of nervous shock claims.

The court allowed the appeal, finding that the trial judge had erred in distinguishing between the initial shock and the subsequent aggravation of the appellant's psychiatric condition due to her caring responsibilities. The court held that the appellant's role as carer did not constitute a *novus actus interveniens* and that the exacerbation of her injury was a foreseeable consequence of the initial event. Consequently, the court reassessed the damages.

The appeal was allowed, the judgment of the trial judge in the sum of $215,341.70 was set aside, and judgment was entered for the appellant in the sum of $412,376.70.