Parrish v Olympic Roadways Pty Ltd and Broome

Case [2018] NSWDC 258


District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Parrish v Olympic Roadways Pty Ltd & Broome [2018] NSWDC 258
Hearing dates: 11, 12, 13 and 14 September 2017; 7 and 12 September 2018
Date of orders: 20 September 2018
Decision date: 20 September 2018
Jurisdiction:Civil
Before: Judge Levy SC
Decision:

1. The plaintiff’s damages are provisionally assessed in the interim sum of $3,032,245.96;

 

2. That interim sum is to be adjusted for the correct amounts to be allowed for Fox v Wood damages and out-of-pocket expenses, and to allow for the adjustment required by s 151Z(2) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987, after the parties have had the opportunity to consider the effect of the findings of fact identified in these reasons;

 3. The proceedings are listed for mention at 10.00am on 21 September 2018 for the purpose of the parties bringing in short minutes dealing with the required adjustments that reflect the findings of fact, at which time final judgment and ancillary orders will be entered, or alternatively, to set a timetable for those matters to be further argued for resolution.
Catchwords: TORTS – negligence – motor vehicle accident – liability admitted; DAMAGES – sustained physical injuries in distressing circumstances leading to police officer developing post-traumatic stress disorder and inability to work – assessment of claimed heads of damage
Legislation Cited: Civil Liability Act 2002, s 5D, s 5E
Evidence Act 1995, s 60
Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999, s 83, s 126, s 136, s 141B
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, r 31.27(1)(c); Sch 7 cl 5(1)(c); s 31.28
Workers Compensation Act 1987, s 151L, s 151Z
Cases Cited: Adelaide Stevedoring Co Ltd v Forst [1940] HCA 45; (1940) 64 CLR 538
Alcan Gove Pty Ltd v Zabic [2015] HCA 33; (2015) 257 CLR 1
Azar v Kathirgamalingan [2012] NSWCA 429; (2012) 62 MVR 462
Boral Bricks Pty Ltd v Cosmidis [2013] NSWCA 443
Bourhill v Young [1943] AC 92
Chappel v Hart [1998] HCA 55; 195 CLR 232
Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Limited v Haleluka [2012] NSWCA 343
Container Terminals Australia Ltd v Huseyin [2008] NSWCA 320
Coote v Kelly [2013] NSWCA 357
Cupac v Cannone [2015] NSWCA 114
Dasreef Pty Ltd v Hawchar [2011] HCA 21; (2011) 243 CLR 588
Dulieu v White [1901] 2 KB 669
Fox v Wood [1981] HCA 41; (1981) 148 CLR 438
Glen v Sullivan [2015] NSWCA 191
Kempsey District Hospital v Thackham (1995) 36 NSWLR 492
Larson v Commissioner of Police [2004] NSWCA 126
Majkic v Bonnano [2008] NSWCA 253
Makita (Australia) Pty Ltd v Sprowles [2001] NSWCA 305; (2001) 52 NSWLR 705
Malec v JC Hutton Pty Ltd [1990] HCA 20; (1990) 169 CLR 638
Manly Municipal Council v Skene [2002] NSWCA 385
Mason v Demasi [2009] NSWCA 227
Mt Isa Mines Ltd v Pusey [1970] HCA 60; (1970) 125 CLR 383
New South Wales v Fahy [2007] HCA 20; (2007) 81 ALJR 1021
Purkess v Crittenden [1965]…

Continue reading Parrish v Olympic Roadways Pty Ltd and Broome

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Parrish v Olympic Roadways Pty Ltd and Broome [2018] NSWDC 258
Case
[2018] NSWDC 258
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved a claim for damages by the plaintiff, a police officer, following a motor vehicle accident. The defendants, Olympic Roadways Pty Ltd and Broome, admitted liability for the accident. The plaintiff alleged that he sustained physical injuries in distressing circumstances and subsequently developed post-traumatic stress disorder, rendering him unable to work. The matter was before the court to assess the claimed heads of damage.

The legal issues before the court were the assessment of the plaintiff's claimed damages, which included compensation for his physical injuries, distress, post-traumatic stress disorder, and loss of income. The court had to consider the appropriate amount of damages to be awarded, taking into account the specific circumstances of the case and the impact of the accident on the plaintiff's life.

The court examined the evidence and submissions presented by both parties and determined that the plaintiff's damages should be provisionally assessed in the interim sum of $3,032,245.96. The court noted that this sum would be adjusted for the correct amounts to be allowed for Fox v Wood damages and out-of-pocket expenses, and to allow for the adjustment required by section 151Z(2) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987, after the parties had the opportunity to consider the effect of the findings of fact identified in the reasons. The court listed the proceedings for mention on 21 September 2018 for the parties to bring in short minutes dealing with the required adjustments, at which time final judgment and ancillary orders would be entered, or alternatively, to set a timetable for those matters to be further argued for resolution.

The court's final orders were that the plaintiff's damages were provisionally assessed in the interim sum of $3,032,245.96, subject to adjustment as outlined in the reasons. The proceedings were listed for mention on 21 September 2018 for the parties to bring in short minutes dealing with the required adjustments, at which time final judgment and ancillary orders would be entered, or alternatively, to set a timetable for those matters to be further argued for resolution.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The plaintiff’s damages are provisionally assessed in the interim sum of $3,032,245.96;

2. That interim sum is to be adjusted for the correct amounts to be allowed for Fox v Wood damages and out-of-pocket expenses, and to allow for the adjustment required by s 151Z(2) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987, after the parties have had the opportunity to consider the effect of the findings of fact identified in these reasons;

3. The proceedings are listed for mention at 10.00am on 21 September 2018 for the purpose of the parties bringing in short minutes dealing with the required adjustments that reflect the findings of fact, at which time final judgment and ancillary orders will be entered, or alternatively, to set a timetable for those matters to be further argued for resolution.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.