Gulic v Angelovski

The appeal in *Gulic v Angelovski* concerned a dispute between a former client, the appellant, and their solicitor, the respondent. The client alleged that the solicitor had breached their duty of care, leading to a claim for damages. The central issue on appeal was the assessment of damages, specifically whether the primary judge had erred in awarding modest damages for loss of earning capacity.

The court was required to determine whether the primary judge’s assessment of damages for loss of earning capacity was demonstrably wrong. This involved considering the principles governing the award of damages for personal injury in a notional trial scenario, and whether the evidence supported the quantum of damages awarded by the primary judge.

The appellate court upheld the primary judge's decision, finding no error in the assessment of damages. The reasoning likely involved a careful review of the evidence presented at trial regarding the appellant's earning capacity and the impact of the solicitor's alleged breach. The court applied established legal principles for assessing loss of earning capacity, which typically requires consideration of the plaintiff's pre-injury circumstances, the nature and extent of their injuries, and their future employment prospects. The appellate court concluded that the primary judge's award was within the range of reasonable outcomes based on the evidence.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent’s costs.