Grieve v Gomez

[2017] QDC 298

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Grieve v Gomez [2017] QDC 298

PARTIES:

FAYE HELEN GRIEVE

(Plaintiff)

v

RENE GOMEZ

(Defendant)

FILE NO/S:

233 of 2016

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Assessment of Damages

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court Southport

DELIVERED ON:

8 December 2017

DELIVERED AT:

Southport

HEARING DATE:

30 November 2017

JUDGE:

Muir DCJ

ORDER:

1.        The defendant pay the plaintiff the sum of $43,247.69 including interest of $5,604.23.

2.        The defendant pay the plaintiff’s costs of the proceeding including reserved costs (if any) to be assessed [on the Magistrates Court Scale]. 

3.        The defendant pay the plaintiff’s costs of obtaining the Mareva Orders to be assessed on the District Court Scale. 

CATCHWORDS:

ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – GENERAL AND SPECIAL DAMAGES – EXEMPLARY AND AGGRAVATED DAMAGES – where plaintiff has an action for damages for negligence, breach of duty, assault and/or battery – where defendant was a doctor at the relevant time – where plaintiff was a patient of the defendant at the relevant time – where plaintiff suffered a relapse of a probable pre-existing diagnosis of Complex Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as a result of the conduct of the defendant - whether exemplary and aggravated damages should be awarded – whether costs should be assessed on the District Court or Magistrates Court scale.

Civil Liability Act 2011 (Qld)

Civil Proceedings Act 2011 (Qld), Section 58
Personal Injuries Proceedings Act (Qld) 2002, Section 43
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999, Part 8, Chapter 13, Rule 697

Backwell v AAA [1997] 1 VR 182, considered
Bilic & Bilic v Nicholls & Anor [2013] QDC 110, considered
Coffey v State of Queensland [2010] QCA 291, followed
Connolly v Queensland Rugby Union [2017] QDC 251, considered
Davis & Anor v Bound & Anor [2011] QDC 082, considered
Henry v Thompson [1989] 2 Qd R 412, considered
Jordan v Bailey [2015] QDC 34, considered
K v G [2010] QSC 013, followed
Malec v J.C. Hutton Pty Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 638, considered
P v R [2010] QSC 139, followed
Stereff v Rycen& Anor [2010] QDC 117, considered
TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd v Anning (2002) 54 NSWLR 333, cited
Uren v John Fairfax and Sons Pty Ltd (1966) 117 CLR 118, considered
WAQ v Di Pino [2012] QCA 283, followed
Webster v Yasso [2002] QDC 206, considered

COUNSEL:

Mr J Given for the plaintiff

SOLICITORS:

Gall Stanfield and Smith for the plaintiff

Dr R Gomez was self-represented

Introduction

1. This is an assessment of damages in an action for damages for negligence, breach of duty, assault and/or battery.[1] The proceeding was commenced by a claim filed on 14 September 2016, and judgment in default of a Notice of Intention to Defend was signed by the Registrar on 7 June 2017. Damages are being assessed pursuant to that judgment in accordance with Part 8 of Chapter 13 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999.

   [1]The plaintiff also claims damages for breach…