Local Court
New South Wales
- Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Lowe v Pearce [2016] NSWLC 5 Hearing dates: 03 February 2016 Date of orders: 04 March 2016 Decision date: 04 March 2016 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Assessor Olischlager Decision: Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $1,580.26 together with interest pursuant to section 100 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 from 13/2/2015. Costs reserved.
Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEEDINGS – Small Claims – motor vehicle accident – damages – loss of use – credit hire – precedents Legislation Cited: Local Court Act 2007, ss 7, 10
Supreme Court Act 1970, s 69Cases Cited: Anthanasopoulos v Moseley [2001] NSWCA 266; (2001) 52 NSWLR 262
Bee v Jenson [2007] EWCA Civ 923
Bone v Commissioner of Stamp Duties [1972] 2 NSWLR 651
Brunner v Greenslade [1971] Ch 993
Charafeddine v Morgan [2014] NSWCA 74
Chong v Berry [2007] NSWLC 33
Darren Bent v Highways and Utilities Construction Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 292
Droga v Cannon [2015] NSWSC 1910
Fang v Koumekelis [2013] NSWLC 5
Farah Constructions v Say-Dee Pty Ltd [2007] 230 CLR 89
Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Salenger (1988) 19 FCR 378
J & E Hall Ltd v Barclay [1937] 3 All ER 620
Lagden v O’Connor [2004] 1 AC 1067
Livingstone v Rawyards Coal Co (1880) 5 App Cas 25
McBride v Monzie Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 1947
Metleg v Sheikh (unreported, Local Court, Grogin LCM, 6 November 2015)
Ross, Garry v State Transit Authority of NSW & Higgins, Sean [2015] NSWLC 11
“The Mediana” [1900] AC 113
Valentine v Eid (1992) 27 NSWLR 615
Viro v R (1978) 141 CLR 88
Wakim v Mathiew Pty Ltd t/as Dove Migration Services [2002] NSWSC 405
Wong v Maroubra Automotive Refinishers Pty Ltd [2015] NSWSC 222
Yates v Mobile Marine Repairs Pty Ltd and Anor [2007] NSWSC 1463Texts Cited: D Heydon, “Limits to the Powers of Ultimate Appellate Courts” (2006) 122 LQR 399 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Raelene Lowe (plaintiff)
Laurell Pearce (defendant)Representation: Solicitors:
Mr Board (for plaintiff)
Mr Simpson (for defendant)
File Number(s): 2015/00176395 Publication restriction: Nil
Judgment
-
This is a claim for damages arising from a motor vehicle collision that occurred on 24 September 2013.
-
At the trial on the 3 February 2016 the Court found that the collision was wholly due to the negligence of the defendant.
-
The defendant disputes the quantum claimed by the plaintiff for damages for the loss of use of the plaintiff’s vehicle while it was being repaired. The plaintiff was the owner of 2009 Holden Commodore. On 2 February 2015 the plaintiff took the damaged motor vehicle to C-Us-First Smash Repairs to be repaired. That same day she submitted an application for a replacement vehicle to Right2Drive under a credit hire agreement. She took possession of a Ford Falcon vehicle under the hire agreement at a basic daily rental rate of $90 per day together with excess reduction and vehicle registration recovery fees. The plaintiff has not been required…
Continue reading Lowe v Pearce
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Lowe v Pearce [2016] NSWLC 5
- Case
- [2016] NSWLC 5
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine the appropriate amount of damages for the loss of use of the plaintiff's vehicle and whether the credit hire car costs claimed by the plaintiff were reasonable and necessary. This included assessing the evidence provided regarding the value of the loss of use and the necessity and reasonableness of the credit hire car expenses. The court had to consider precedents and the statutory provisions available for determining such damages and costs in motor vehicle accident cases.
The court found that the evidence provided by the plaintiff was sufficient to establish the loss of use of the vehicle and the reasonableness of the credit hire car expenses. The court applied the relevant statutory provisions and precedents to calculate the damages, arriving at a total of $1,580.26 for the loss of use and credit hire car costs. The court awarded the plaintiff this sum, together with interest from the date of the accident until the judgment date, and reserved the issue of costs for further consideration.
The court's final order was for the plaintiff to be awarded a verdict and judgment in the sum of $1,580.26, plus interest pursuant to section 100 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 from 13/2/2015. Costs were reserved for further determination.
Orders
Orders of the court
Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $1,580.26 together with interest pursuant to section 100 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 from 13/2/2015. Costs reserved.
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.