James v James (No. 3) - [2020] NSWDC 797

District Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: James v James (No. 3) [2020] NSWDC 797
Hearing dates: 12-13, 16 November 2020
Date of orders: 16 November 2020
Decision date: 16 November 2020
Jurisdiction: Civil
Before: Neilson DCJ
Decision:
Verdict and Judgment for the Plaintiff for $358,520 plus costs.

Catchwords:
TORTS – Assault and Assault and Battery – Torts occurring on two occasions 26 September 2017 and 20 February 2018 – Assessment of Damages only – Domestic Violence – As a result of 20 February 2018 torts P. suffering Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and unable to work.

Legislation Cited:
Civil Liability Act 2002
Evidence Act 1995
Surveillance Devices Act 2007

Cases Cited:
Cooper v Mulcahy [2013] NSWCA 160

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Plaintiff – Shannon James
Defendant – Shaun James
Representation:
Plaintiff:
W. Priestley (Counsel)
J. Hill (Randall Lawyers)
Defendant:
In person – unrepresented

File Number(s): 2020/00184759
Publication restriction: Nil.

Judgment

HIS HONOUR: The plaintiff, Ms Shannon James, brings an action for damages for the torts of assault and assault and battery. She brings the proceedings against her former husband, Shaun Robert Bruce James. The plaintiff obtained default judgment. For reasons which I have already given, I refused the defendant’s application to set aside the default judgment. Under the operation of the rules, the pleadings have been admitted but there is not any admission concerning the quantum of damages. This essentially is an assessment of the plaintiff’s damages.

26 September 2017

The first torts are alleged to have occurred on 26 September 2017. The pleading in the statement of claim is this:

“5. On 26 September 2017, the defendant assaulted, verbally assaulted and physically battered the plaintiff without her consent or just cause or provocation following a disagreement between them in relation to their farming business and the plaintiff’s parenting.

PARTICULARS OF VERBAL ASSAULT

6. The defendant caused the plaintiff to fear that she would be battered by the defendant by directing the following phrases to the plaintiff in an aggressive and violent fashion:

(a) Mole

(b) Cunt

(d) Liar

(e) Bitch

(f) Fucking bitch

(g) Fucking slut

(h) Full of shit loser

(i) Two-faced cunt

(j) Slag

(k) Lazy bitch

(l) Loser

PARTICULARS OF THE BATTERY

(a) The defendant used his shoulders and arms with the intention of detaining the plaintiff and to prevent the plaintiff from moving away from him.

(b) The defendant grabbed the plaintiff’s arms and wrists to prevent the plaintiff from moving away from him.

The plaintiff’s evidence about that event was terse.
The plaintiff and the defendant were, as I said, married. The defendant appears to be one year older than the plaintiff. The plaintiff is currently 46 years old. The plaintiff has been seen by Dr Peter Klug, a forensic psychiatrist, who interviewed her by Skype for nearly two hours on 26 July 2020. Dr Klug took this history of the plaintiff’s relationship with…

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 James v James (No. 3)

Details

AGLC: James v James (No. 3) [2020] NSWDC 797
Case: [2020] NSWDC 797
Decision Date: 16 November 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of James v James (No. 3) involved a claim for damages arising from two separate incidents of domestic violence. The plaintiff, James, sought compensation for injuries sustained during these incidents, which occurred on 26 September 2017 and 20 February 2018. The defendant, also James, was held liable for the torts of assault and battery. The plaintiff alleged that as a result of the 20 February 2018 incident, they suffered from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and were unable to work, which significantly impacted their quality of life.

The primary legal issues the court had to address were the extent and nature of the injuries sustained by the plaintiff, and whether these injuries were directly attributable to the defendant's actions. The court also needed to determine the appropriate amount of damages to compensate for the plaintiff's injuries, loss of income, and the impact on their mental health. Given the severe and lasting consequences of the defendant's actions, the court was tasked with ensuring that the damages awarded were sufficient to cover the plaintiff's losses and to provide a measure of deterrence against future similar conduct.

In reaching its decision, the court carefully considered medical evidence and expert testimony regarding the plaintiff's PTSD and its effects on their ability to work. The court acknowledged the significant emotional and financial impact of the injuries on the plaintiff and awarded damages that reflected the severity and permanence of the harm caused. The court found that the total amount of $358,520, plus costs, was appropriate to compensate the plaintiff for their losses and to serve as a deterrent against similar future conduct. The court's judgment emphasised the importance of protecting victims of domestic violence and ensuring they receive adequate compensation for their injuries.

Orders

Orders of the court

Verdict and Judgment for the Plaintiff for $358,520 plus costs.

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	James v James (No. 3) [2020] NSWDC 797
Hearing dates:	12-13, 16 November 2020
Date of orders:	16 November 2020
Decision date:	16 November 2020
Jurisdiction:	Civil
Before:	Neilson DCJ
Decision:	Verdict and Judgment for the Plaintiff for $358,520 plus costs.
Catchwords:	TORTS – Assault and Assault and Battery – Torts occurring on two occasions 26 September 2017 and 20 February 2018 – Assessment of Damages only – Domestic Violence – As a result of 20 February 2018 torts P. suffering Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and unable to work.
Legislation Cited:	Civil Liability Act 2002 Evidence Act 1995 Surveillance Devices Act 2007
Cases Cited:	Cooper v Mulcahy [2013] NSWCA 160
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Plaintiff – Shannon James Defendant – Shaun James
Representation:	Plaintiff: W. Priestley (Counsel) J. Hill (Randall Lawyers) Defendant: In person – unrepresented
File Number(s):	2020/00184759
Publication restriction:	Nil.