Hick v. Frisby and Anor

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

 Hick v Frisby and Anor [2008] QSC 161

PARTIES:

CHERNITA MARIE HICK

(Plaintiff)

V
ROBERT ALLAN FRISBY
(First Defendant)

AND

TRANSPORT ACCIDENT COMMISSION
ABN 22 033 947 623

(Second Defendant)

FILE NO/S:

Mackay 15 of 2008

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Trial

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Mackay

DELIVERED ON:

31 July 2008

DELIVERED AT:

Rockhampton

HEARING DATE:

10 and 11 July

JUDGE:

McMeekin J

ORDERS:

1. There will be judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $719,017.20

CATCHWORDS

DAMAGES – MEASURE AND REMOTENESS OF DAMAGES IN ACTIONS FOR TORT - MEASURE OF DAMAGES – PERSONAL INJURIES – where the plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle accident – where liability is not in issue – where damages are assessed under the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) – where past and future economic loss are assessed – where the plaintiff’s capacity to perform work is adversely affected- where degeneration from the injury is to be taken into consideration

DAMAGES – MEASURE AND REMOTENESS OF DAMAGES IN ACTIONS FOR TORT - MEASURE OF DAMAGES – PERSONAL INJURIES – where gratuitous care and domestic assistance assessed – where appropriate rate per hour discussed - where tasks performed for benefit of the household.

Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld), s 51, s61, s 62.

Civil Liability Regulation 2003 (Qld), s 6, Sch 3, Sch 4.

Malec v Hutton (1990) 169 CLR 638 applied

Griffiths v Kerkemeyer  (1977) 139 CLR 161 followed

Van Gervan v Fenton (1992) 175 CLR 327 followed

McChesney v Singh [2003] QCA 498 followed

Goode v Thomson [2002] QCA 138, followed.

COUNSEL:

G Crow for the plaintiff
M Grant-Taylor SC and R Ashton for the defendant

SOLICITORS:

Macrossan and Amiet Solicitors for the plaintiff
Quinlan Miller & Treston Lawyers for the defendant

1. MCMEEKIN J: In this action the plaintiff, Chernita Hick, claims damages for personal injuries suffered in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 20 August 2004, a few weeks after her 17^th birthday[1]. Liability is not in issue.

   [1]Date of Birth: 1 August 1987

1. The accident plainly involved very substantial forces. Mr Crow of counsel, who appeared for the plaintiff, tendered photographs of the motor vehicle in which Ms Hick was travelling taken after the accident.[2] They show a motor vehicle torn apart. Ms Hick’s mother was killed in the accident.

   [2]Ex 15

1. It is not in contest that Ms Hick suffered serious injuries. Those injuries are set out in the plaintiff’s statement of claim[3] as follows:

   [3]See paragraph 7 and for the plaintiff’s evidence see paragraph 9 of her statement Ex 2

(a)        head injury with scalp laceration;

(b)        a fracture dislocation of the left shoulder including fractures of the left scapular, acromion, and coracoid process;

(c)        injury to the thoracic spine including fracture of the spinous processes of T1 and T2;

(d)        fractures of the left first rib;

(e)        a right sided pneumothorax;

(f)        a comminuted fracture of the right scapular and fracture of the neck of the right humerus;