Hill v State of Queensland

[2013] QDC 227

[2013] QDC 227

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CIVIL JURISDICTION

JUDGE ROBIN QC

No 2339 of 2012

JORDAN LOMAS TERRENCE HILL  Plaintiff

and

STATE OF QUEENSLAND  Defendant

BRISBANE

10.34 AM, THURSDAY, 23 MAY 2013

ORDER

CATCHWORDS

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules r98
Public Trustee Act 1978 s59

Consideration of appropriate form of order sanctioning compromise of a minor’s personal injuries claim

HIS HONOUR: The court makes an order in terms of the initialled draft which authorises the compromise of this proceeding in which the plaintiff is an eight year old boy proceeding by his litigation guardian, who’s his grandmother. Do you mind if I change the beginning of the order to say it’s settled pursuant to section 59 of the Act and Rule 98?

MR KING-SCOTT:   No, your Honour.

…

HIS HONOUR: The order contains some changes from the one proffered by Mr King-Scott appearing for the plaintiff. One of them is to refer to Rule 98 as well as section 59 of the Public Trustee Act 1978, as the basis of the application which in fact is made by an interlocutory application subject of leave to read and file today. This was to be the trial date. The compromise which the court sanctions occurred only recently. There was also deleted from the draft order a provision that the registrar transmit a copy of the order and the material read today to QCAT. That’s a common provision where legal incapacity has been suffered by an adult, but inappropriate for this eight year old boy.

I expressed concern at an order that by way of further damages over and above the compromise sum, the defendant pay reasonable management fees, be payable to the Public Trustee for management of the principal settlement sum.  I’m given to understand that this provision comes from the Supreme Court Practice Direction.  I’m confident that any difficulties that might arise can be dealt with pursuant to the liberty to apply contained in the order which expressly extends to the parties and the trustee.  Exhibit 2 is a copy of a letter of notification sent to the Public Trustee by the plaintiff’s solicitors which establishes notice been given of today’s hearing.  This is not the type of commission that the Public Trustee is likely to decline, but should there prove to be unwillingness to undertake the management function, that also can be dealt with under the liberty to apply. 

Exhibit 1 is a bundle of 31 photographs showing the serious cosmetic damage suffered by the young plaintiff in consequence of a medical misadventure to do with drugs being instilled into his arm in concentrations that were inappropriate given his age.  Views of what might be the correct range of damages outcomes have fluctuated, the great unknown being in respect of future economic loss.  If life panned out favourably for the plaintiff, there might be none.  Not one, but three opinions of Mr King-Scott which culminate in his recommending the settlement. Given the uncertainties which, relate only to quantum as the defendant admitted liability, I’m satisfied that the compromise is in the plaintiff’s best interest.  Instructions have been given by the litigation guardian for it to be accepted and there’s a solicitor’s opinion placed before the Court in addition to Mr King-Scott’s to the effect that the compromise is in the interests of the young boy.  So the order is as per initial draft.

______________________