Medlin v State Government Insurance Commission

The applicant, Mr Medlin, sought special leave to appeal from a decision of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia. The dispute concerned the assessment of damages for personal injuries sustained by Mr Medlin. The applicant argued that the courts below erred in their application of the principles of causation and in their assessment of damages for loss of earning capacity.

The High Court was required to determine two principal legal issues. The first concerned whether the courts below had correctly applied the test for causation in assessing damages, specifically whether they had erred by applying a "pre-eminent cause" test rather than the appropriate test as established in *March v The Ordinary*. The second issue related to the non-allowance of damages for loss of earning capacity, where the applicant argued that the trial judge, in relying on *Graham v Baker*, had incorrectly determined that no damages should be awarded for such loss when it did not result in actual economic loss, contrary to the principles affirmed in *Griffiths v Kerkemeyer* and *Van Gerven*.

The applicant contended that the courts below erred in their approach to causation by applying a "pre-eminent cause" test, which was inconsistent with the High Court's decision in *March v The Ordinary*. Regarding the loss of earning capacity, the applicant argued that the Full Court, by upholding the trial judge's reliance on *Graham v Baker*, had failed to award damages for a loss of capacity that was not productive of economic loss. This was said to be contrary to the reasoning in *Griffiths v Kerkemeyer* and *Donnelly v Joyce*, which established that damages for a need occasioned by injury should be compensated regardless of whether an expense was actually incurred. The applicant's argument was that even if the injury did not result in immediate economic loss due to a charitable employer, damages for the loss of earning capacity itself should still be allowed.