JMD v GJH

The case of JMD v GJH involved a dispute over personal injuries arising from sexual assaults for which the defendant was convicted. The plaintiff sought summary judgment for the tort of assault and battery, in addition to damages for the defendant's conviction for the offence of pursuing another to intimidate. The defendant contested the plaintiff's claims, arguing that he was not liable for the tort of intentional infliction of harm, and that the plaintiff's damages should be assessed without awarding aggravated damages.

The primary legal issues for the court to determine were whether the defendant was liable for the tort of intentional infliction of harm, and if so, the appropriate assessment of damages, including whether aggravated damages should be awarded. The court had to consider the extent to which the defendant's criminal conviction for pursuing another to intimidate could inform the tortious liability and the quantum of damages. The court also needed to assess whether the defendant's conduct amounted to intentional infliction of harm, separate and apart from the criminal conviction.

The court found that the defendant was indeed liable for the tort of intentional infliction of harm, as his actions were intentional and caused harm to the plaintiff. The court emphasised that the criminal conviction for pursuing another to intimidate could not preclude the plaintiff's claim for tortious damages. In assessing damages, the court determined that the plaintiff was entitled to aggravated damages, given the nature and circumstances of the defendant's conduct. The court awarded the plaintiff damages for pain and suffering, loss of amenities, and special damages, along with aggravated damages, reflecting the egregious nature of the defendant's actions.

The final orders of the court included a declaration that the defendant was liable for the tort of intentional infliction of harm, and that the plaintiff was entitled to damages for pain and suffering, loss of amenities, special damages, and aggravated damages. The court ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff the assessed damages in full.