Najdovski v Crnojlovic

The appeal concerned an assessment of damages awarded in the District Court following a motor vehicle accident. The appellant, Mr. Najdovski, challenged the adequacy of the damages awarded by the trial judge, arguing that the assessment failed to properly consider relevant evidence regarding his incapacity, disabilities, past and future economic loss, superannuation entitlements, and attendant care services. The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the trial judge's assessment was fair and proper, and whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to re-assess damages itself.

The central legal issues revolved around the adequacy of the damages awarded and the proper interpretation and application of various legislative provisions. Specifically, the court had to consider the construction of section 15C of the *Civil Liability Act 2002* (NSW) concerning the calculation of lost superannuation entitlements, and whether a purposive or literal interpretation was appropriate. The court also had to determine if the trial judge had failed to consider relevant and material evidence, thereby necessitating a re-assessment of damages by the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge's reasons for the assessment of damages were inadequate and that relevant and material evidence had not been properly considered. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal in relation to the assessment of damages. The court set aside the District Court judgment and directed the parties to confer to agree on a substituted judgment figure, to take effect from the original trial date. If agreement could not be reached, the parties were to provide submissions on the substituted judgment amount and any special orders regarding costs.