Megally v Bojanic (No 2)

In Megally v Bojanic (No 2), the applicant, Mr Megally, appealed from the Local Court's decision on the quantum of damages in a motor vehicle accident case. The respondent, Mr Bojanic, had admitted liability. The case originated in the Small Claims Division, but was transferred to the General Division of the Local Court. The applicant sought to litigate perceived errors in the damages assessment, but did not press any entitlement to his original claim. The appeal primarily concerned a relatively small amount of damages and interest, which was significantly overshadowed by the costs involved in continuing litigation.

The legal issues before the court included the legitimacy of an invoice for repairs to the applicant's vehicle, which the applicant sought to use as a benchmark for the cost of repairs. There were competing opinions from respective experts and a joint experts' report, which the court considered in determining the proper assessment of damages. The court also had to address the applicant's claims that were either without merit or substance. The court was required to determine the appropriateness of the damages awarded, and whether the applicant's claims for additional expenses were justified.

The court found that several of the applicant's claims lacked merit or substance, including one that had a fantastical quality. The court rejected the applicant's argument that the invoice could be used as a benchmark for the cost of repairs, given the unclear circumstances surrounding the repair work. The court held that the Local Court's assessment of damages was appropriate and dismissed the appeal. The court also noted the significant costs involved in the litigation, which far exceeded the amount in dispute. The appeal was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.