Francis John Maguire as Executor of the Estate of the Late Janetta Katrina Maguire v Susan Gai Maguire - [2001] ACTSC 93

Francis John Maguire as Executor of the Estate of the Late Janetta Katrina Maguire v Susan Gai Maguire [2001] ACTSC 93 (28 September 2001)

CATCHWORDS

DAMAGES – Personal injuries - Liability for out of pocket expenses – Whether post accident hospitalisation was required as a result of accident or of a pre-existing degenerative condition.

Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1955

Griffiths v Kerkemeyer (1977) 193 CLR 161
Purkess v Crittenden (1965) 114 CLR 164
Watts v Rake (1960) 108 CLR 158

No. SC 824 of 1999

Coram: Master T. Connolly
Supreme Court of the ACT
Date: 28 September 2001

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE )
) No. SC 824 of 1999
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY )

BETWEEN:FRANCIS JOHN MAGUIRE AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE JANETTA KATRINA MAGUIRE
Plaintiff

AND:SUSAN GAI MAGUIRE
Defendant

ORDER

Coram:  Master T. Connolly
Date:  28 September 2001
Place:  Canberra

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

Judgment be entered for the plaintiff in the sum of $60,000.00 plus out of pocket expenses as described in paragraph 2 with the defendant to pay the plaintiff’s costs.
The defendant is to be held financially accountable for the out of pocket expenses incurred from March 1997 to 30 June 1997 only.
The parties are given leave to submit short minutes of order in relation to the exact payments to be made.

This is a claim for damages for personal injuries arising from an accident which occurred in the home of the defendant in Rose Bay, New South Wales, on 24 March 1997 when a number of boxes and articles of household furnishings fell from a cupboard and struck Mrs Janetta Maguire in the head, causing personal injuries.

Mrs Maguire, who was aged 62 at the time of the accident, had suffered from rheumatoid arthritis from the age of 15, and had undergone four major joint replacements by the time of the accident, as well as fusion procedures at various levels in her cervical spine. She was admitted to hospital five days after the accident, and remained in hospital until 30 May 1997. She was again admitted to hospital in March 1998 and underwent a further surgical fusion at C6-T2. From that procedure she has had frequent re admissions to various hospitals for complications arising from this surgery and widespread degenerative problems. Mrs Maguire passed away on 9 September 2000 due to a condition which it is common ground was unrelated to the accident, and the action has been continued by her estate pursuant to s. 4(1) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1955.

Liability was admitted at this hearing, and counsel further advised me that there was agreement between the parties that it would be appropriate to enter judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $60,000 in respect of general damages, and damages pursuant to the principles of Griffiths v Kerkemeyer (1977) 193 CLR 161 for the extensive domestic care and assistance provided to the deceased plaintiff by her husband.

The real issue for…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Francis John Maguire as Executor of the Estate of the Late J...

Details

AGLC: Francis John Maguire as Executor of the Estate of the Late Janetta Katrina Maguire v Susan Gai Maguire [2001] ACTSC 93
Case: [2001] ACTSC 93
Decision Date: 28 September 2001

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Francis John Maguire as Executor of the Estate of the Late Janetta Katrina Maguire versus Susan Gai Maguire, the Federal Court of Australia was tasked with determining the liability for personal injury damages and out-of-pocket expenses. The plaintiff sought compensation for injuries sustained by the deceased from a motor vehicle accident involving the defendant. The primary dispute centred on whether certain post-accident hospitalisation expenses were necessitated by the accident itself or by a pre-existing degenerative condition.

The court had to ascertain whether the hospitalisation and related costs incurred by the deceased from March 1997 were due to the accident or pre-existing medical issues. Specifically, the court examined the medical evidence to determine the causation of the injuries and the necessity of the treatments received. The crux of the legal issue was to establish the extent to which the accident contributed to the deceased’s medical needs and expenses, excluding those related to the pre-existing condition.

The court concluded that the hospitalisation expenses incurred from March 1997 were a result of the accident. It found that the defendant was liable for these expenses but not for those beyond June 1997, which were attributable to the pre-existing condition. The court awarded damages of $60,000.00 plus out-of-pocket expenses for the specified period, with the defendant to bear the costs. Additionally, the defendant was held responsible for the expenses from March 1997 to June 1997. The parties were granted leave to submit minutes of order for the precise payment details.

Orders

Orders of the court

Judgment be entered for the plaintiff in the sum of $60,000.00 plus out of pocket expenses as described in paragraph 2 with the defendant to pay the plaintiff’s costs.

The defendant is to be held financially accountable for the out of pocket expenses incurred from March 1997 to 30 June 1997 only.

The parties are given leave to submit short minutes of order in relation to the exact payments to be made.

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.