District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Douglas v Douglas [2020] NSWDC 169 Hearing dates: 29 & 30 April Date of orders: 06 May 2020 Decision date: 06 May 2020 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Judge Levy SC Decision: 1. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of $172,527.20;
2. The defendant is to pay the plaintiff’s costs on the ordinary basis unless otherwise ordered;
3. The Registry is to return the exhibits to the parties after the expiry of 28 days;
4. Liberty to apply on 7 days’ notice if further or other orders are required.Catchwords: TORTS – injuries received in a motor vehicle accident – liability admitted; DAMAGES – assessment of claimed heads of damage Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 60
Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (NSW), s 136Cases Cited: Allianz Australia Insurance Ltd v Kerr [2012] NSWCA 13
Brown v Lewis [2006] NSWCA 87
Daw v Toyworld (NSW) Pty Ltd [2001] NSWCA 25
Graham v Baker (1961) 106 CLR 340; [1961] HCA 48
Medlin v State Government Insurance Commission (1995) 182 CLR 1; [1995] HCA 5
Penrith City Council v Parks [2004] NSWCA 201
State of NSW v Moss [2000] NSWCA 133, (2000) 54 NSWLR 536
Wynn v NSW Insurance Ministerial Corporation [1995] HCA 53; (1995) 184 CLR 485Category: Principal judgment Parties: Caitlin Douglas (Plaintiff)
Brighid Douglas (Defendant)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
Mr D Morgan (Plaintiff)
Ms S Warren (Defendant)
Chadwick Lawyers (Plaintiff)
McCabe Curwood (Defendant)
File Number(s): 2019/86834 Publication restriction: None
Judgment
Table of Contents
Nature of case and issues to be determined
[1]
Factual background
[2]
Credibility and reliability of testimony
[3]
Facts
[4] – [23]
Plaintiff’s background circumstances
[5] – [6]
Plaintiff’s pre-accident health
[7] – [8]
Accident circumstances
[9]
Injuries and treatment
[10] – [12]
Subsequent medical and allied reviews
[13]
Conclusions from the medical reports
[14]
Disabilities
[15] – [18]
Work effects
[19]
Domestic effects
[20]
Mitigation
[21]
Plaintiff’s most likely circumstances but for injury
[22] – [23]
Assessment of damages
[24] – [49]
Future loss of earning capacity
[25] – [39]
Future domestic assistance
[40] – [43]
Future treatment expenses
[44] – [46]
Past out-of-pocket expenses
[47] – [48]
Summary of damages assessment
[49]
Disposition
[50]
Costs
[51]
Orders
[52]
Nature of case and issues to be determined
-
These proceedings concern the assessment of the plaintiff’s damages for injuries she received in a motor vehicle accident for which the defendant has admitted liability. The proceedings are governed by the Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (NSW) (“MAC Act”).
Factual background
-
At about 6.36pm on Monday, 24 October 2016, the plaintiff, Caitlin Douglas, then a Year 11 High School student, was a front seat passenger in a motor vehicle being driven by the defendant, her twin sister Ms Brighid Douglas, along Donnells Creek Road, Moruya, New South Wales. That vehicle left the roadway and collided with a tree after the defendant experienced an involuntary sneeze. The collision caused the…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Douglas v Douglas 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2020] NSWDC 169
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was tasked with determining the appropriate amount of damages to be awarded to the plaintiff. This involved assessing the credibility and admissibility of the evidence presented by the plaintiff regarding medical expenses and lost wages, as well as the extent of pain and suffering and property damage. The court had to balance these considerations with the defendant's admission of liability, focusing on the factual basis of the plaintiff's claims and the evidence provided to substantiate those claims.
After considering the evidence and submissions, the court found in favour of the plaintiff. The court awarded damages in the sum of $172,527.20, which included amounts for past and future medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and property damage. The court also ordered that the defendant pay the plaintiff's costs on the ordinary basis unless otherwise ordered. The exhibits were to be returned to the parties after 28 days, and the plaintiff was granted liberty to apply for further or other orders with seven days' notice.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of $172,527.20;
2. The defendant is to pay the plaintiff’s costs on the ordinary basis unless otherwise ordered;
3. The Registry is to return the exhibits to the parties after the expiry of 28 days;
4. Liberty to apply on 7 days’ notice if further or other orders are required.
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.