Metcalfe v Commonwealth of Australia (No 2)

Metcalfe v Commonwealth of Australia (No 2) involved the plaintiff seeking damages for pre-trial pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life. The dispute reached the court, which was required to decide two primary legal issues. The first issue was whether interest should be awarded on the damages for pre-trial pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life, referencing the precedent set in M.B.P. (S.A.) Proprietary Ltd v Gogic. The second issue was related to the plaintiff's costs, specifically whether a Calderbank offer was bettered by the judgment and whether the refusal of the offer was reasonable.

In addressing these issues, the court examined the principles of interest on damages and the precedent set in M.B.P. (S.A.) Proprietary Ltd v Gogic. It concluded that interest should not be awarded on damages for pre-trial pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life, as these damages do not constitute a debt or a sum of money owed. Regarding the Calderbank offer, the court assessed whether the judgment was better than the offer and found that the judgment did not improve upon the offer. The court also considered whether the refusal of the Calderbank offer was reasonable, ultimately determining that the plaintiff had not unreasonably refused the offer.

The court's decision was that interest should not be awarded on the damages for pre-trial pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life. Additionally, the court found that the Calderbank offer had not been bettered by the judgment and that the plaintiff had not unreasonably refused the offer. Therefore, the plaintiff was not entitled to recover costs on an indemnity basis. The final orders of the court reflected these determinations.