Patterson v Khalsa (No.3) - [2013] NSWSC 1331

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Patterson v Khalsa (No.3) [2013] NSWSC 1331
Hearing dates: 10/05/2013
Decision date: 27 September 2013
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Garling J
Decision:
(1) Judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $6,606,583.00
(2) Defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs.

Catchwords:
DAMAGES - Tort - Personal injuries -Assessment of damages - Non-economic loss - statutory method of evaluation under s 16 of Civil Liability Act 2002 - when maximum damages may be awarded - No point of general principle.

DAMAGES - Tort - Assessment of life expectancy - Use of prospective Actuarial Life Tables - No point of general principle.

DAMAGES - Tort - Permanent disablement - Economic loss - Measure of damages available in respect of gratuitous services - No point of general principle.
DAMAGES - Tort -whether a claim for funds management fee is appropriate - plaintiff has permanent disablement and moderate intellectual disability - inability to manage sums of money necessitates Funds Management - No point of general principle.
Legislation Cited: Civil Liability Act 2002
Cases Cited: Ali v Nationwide News Pty Ltd [2008] NSWCA 183
Dell v Dalton [1991] NSWCA 76; (1991) 23 NSWLR 528
Ellis v Wallsend District Hospital (1989) 17 NSWLR 553
Fabre v Arenales (1992) 27 NSWLR 437
Golden Eagle International Trading Pty Ltd v Jian [2007] HCA 15; (2007) 229 CLR 498
Griffith v Kerkemeyer [1977] HCA 44; (1997)139 CLR 161
Matthews v Dean [1990] Aust Torts Reports 81-037
Nominal Defendant v Gardikiotis [1996] HCA 53; (1996) 186 CLR 49
Patterson v Khalsa [2013] NSWSC 336
Southgate v Waterford (1990) 21 NSWLR 427
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Will Patterson (P)
Akal Khalsa (D)
Representation: Counsel:
H Chiu (P)
No appearance (D)
Solicitors:
Slater & Gordon (P)
No appearance (D)

File Number(s): 2009/297855

Judgment

In 2009 the plaintiff, Will Patterson, commenced proceedings by his tutor, Jodie Latter, for damages for negligence against the defendant, Akal Khalsa.

The proceedings concerned the plaintiff's birth at home on 21 October 2006. The defendant, Ms Khalsa, was engaged as an independent midwife to assist, and to be in attendance at the birth. The plaintiff claims that, as a result of Ms Khalsa's negligence, in recommending the home birth in the first place and, subsequently, in the negligent performance of her duties as a midwife, he suffered hypoxia during birth, and was left with cerebral palsy.

On 22 March 2013, for the reasons which were then published, the Court ordered that there be judgment for the plaintiff, with damages to be assessed: Patterson v Khalsa [2013] NSWSC 336.

Directions were given with respect to the process to enable damages to be assessed, and a hearing for the assessment of damages took place on 10 May 2013.

This judgment deals with the assessment of the plaintiff's damages.

The Birth

According to the material tendered, the plaintiff's mother went into labour on the morning of 21 October 2006 at about 41 weeks gestation.

When Ms Khalsa arrived…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Patterson v Khalsa (No.3)

Details

AGLC: Patterson v Khalsa (No.3) [2013] NSWSC 1331
Case: [2013] NSWSC 1331
Decision Date: 27 September 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Patterson v Khalsa (No.3) involved the assessment of damages for personal injuries in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff, Patterson, sued the defendant, Khalsa, for damages arising from an incident that resulted in Patterson sustaining severe personal injuries. The legal issues in the case included the evaluation of non-economic loss, the assessment of life expectancy using prospective Actuarial Life Tables, the measure of damages for economic loss in respect of gratuitous services, and the appropriateness of a claim for a funds management fee due to the plaintiff's permanent disability and moderate intellectual disability.

The court was required to determine the appropriate method for assessing non-economic loss under section 16 of the Civil Liability Act 2002, particularly when considering whether maximum damages could be awarded. Additionally, the court had to decide on the application of prospective Actuarial Life Tables to assess the plaintiff's life expectancy. The court also needed to address the measure of damages available for economic loss in respect of gratuitous services provided to the plaintiff and whether a claim for a funds management fee was appropriate, given the plaintiff's inability to manage sums of money due to their permanent disability and intellectual disability.

The court found that in assessing non-economic loss, the statutory method under section 16 should be applied, but there was no general principle that would dictate the maximum damages in every case. The court ruled that prospective Actuarial Life Tables could be used in assessing life expectancy. Regarding economic loss, the court determined that the measure of damages for gratuitous services should be assessed based on the reasonable cost of such services. Finally, the court held that a claim for a funds management fee was appropriate given the plaintiff's circumstances, as their inability to manage money necessitated such services.

No orders were noted in the text.

Orders