Nominal Defendant v Bogic

This matter concerned an appeal by the Nominal Defendant against a judgment of the trial court awarding damages to the respondent, Mr Bogic, and other claimants under the *Compensation to Relatives Act*. The dispute arose from a motor vehicle accident where the Nominal Defendant's insured driver was found liable for causing the accident. The appeal raised issues concerning the assessment of damages, specifically whether the damages awarded for nervous shock were excessive and the appropriate apportionment of damages under the *Compensation to Relatives Act*.

The court was required to determine whether the quantum of damages awarded to the respondent for nervous shock was excessive and, if so, to reassess that amount. Furthermore, the court had to consider the apportionment of the total damages awarded under the *Compensation to Relatives Act* amongst the respondent and the deceased driver's children, as this had not been addressed by the trial judge.

The court found that the damages awarded for nervous shock were indeed excessive and reduced the respondent's award from $233,999 to $191,905. In relation to the *Compensation to Relatives Act* claim, the court determined an appropriate apportionment based on the material before it. The respondent was to receive 41.8857% of the total award, with the remaining balance to be divided amongst the three children in specified proportions: 82/314 to the eldest, 97/314 to the second, and 135/314 to the youngest. The appeal was otherwise dismissed, with costs awarded to the respondent.