DISTRICT COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA
(Civil)
PLUMRIDGE v PANDELIS
[2022] SADC 42
Judgment of her Honour Judge Thomas
11 April 2022
DAMAGES - ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES IN TORT - PERSONAL INJURY - INTERACTION OF COMMON LAW AND STATUTORY DAMAGES AWARDS
DAMAGES - ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES IN TORT - PERSONAL INJURY - DAMAGES FOR NON-ECONOMIC LOSS - CIVIL LIABILITY LEGISLATION MODIFICATIONS
DAMAGES - ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES IN TORT - PERSONAL INJURY - INCOME LOSS AND LOSS OF EARNING CAPACITY - CIVIL LIABILITY LEGISLATION MODIFICATIONS
The 25-year-old applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident whilst riding her bike to work and claims damages for her physical and psychiatric injuries. Liability was admitted and the trial concerned the assessment of damages.
The applicant claims that as a result of the accident, in addition to pain and suffering, she has suffered permanent injuries to her right shoulder, neck and upper back and developed a post-traumatic stress disorder; that she is now unable to socialise and complete her university degree, has restricted employment opportunities and is unable to return to work in an office environment.
The respondent alleges that the applicant exaggerated the extent of her claimed injuries and the level of adverse impact in circumstances where she successfully completed a further semester of university subjects, found permanent better remunerated full-time sedentary employment in her chosen field as a credit assessor, and was able to socialise, form positive relationships, and coach and play competitive netball and do well, without any significant ongoing treatment in the five years following the accident.
The respondent alleged any impairment to the applicant’s earning capacity was by reason of a pre-existing major depressive disorder she has suffered since childhood.
Judgment is to be entered for the applicant in the amount of $271,864 plus interest and costs.
Held:
(1) Damages for non-economic loss are assessed under s 52(3) of the Civil Liability Act 1936 on the basis that the injury to the applicant’s right shoulder is the dominant injury of her multiple injuries and the applicable ISV item number is 92.2 with a range of 6 to 10. To reflect the level of adverse impact of her multiple injuries, it is appropriate for the ISV for her dominant injury to be higher than the maximum of 10. The ISV is increased by 25% and rounded up to a whole number, 13, resulting in an award of damages for non-economic loss of $5,200.
(2) The expert medical diagnosis of the applicant’s psychiatric condition arising from the accident (PTSD) and GEPIC rating for psychiatric impairment provided in a GEPIC report under regs 14 and 23 of the Civil Liability Regulations 2013 are to be accepted.
(3) The applicant’s PTSD arising from the accident is the primary impairment to her earning capacity. The residual disabilities arising from the applicant’s physical injuries have otherwise been accommodated and do not adversely impact her earning capacity for a higher earning sedentary role.
(4) The applicant’s PTSD arising from the accident has not deprived her of the…
Continue reading Plumridge v PANDELIS
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Plumridge v PANDELIS [2022] SADC 42
- Case
- [2022] SADC 42
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the court were the assessment of damages for non-economic loss, the recognition and quantification of psychiatric impairment, and the determination of lost earning capacity in light of statutory modifications to civil liability legislation. The court was required to interpret and apply relevant sections of the Civil Liability Act 1936 and the Civil Liability Regulations 2013 to these assessments.
In its decision, the court determined that the plaintiff's right shoulder injury was the dominant injury among multiple injuries, warranting an increased injury severity value (ISV) for non-economic loss. The court accepted the expert diagnosis of the plaintiff's post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and the General Economic and Personal Injury Condition (GEPIC) rating for psychiatric impairment. The court found that the plaintiff's PTSD was the primary impairment to her earning capacity, superseding any residual disabilities from physical injuries. It was held that the plaintiff's PTSD did not prevent her from pursuing higher-level roles but did hinder her ability to undertake people management positions. The court calculated the plaintiff's lost earning capacity and economic loss, applying statutory discounts as mandated by the legislation. Additionally, the court awarded future medical expenses, services, and equipment, as well as past medical expenses. The total damages awarded, inclusive of interest, amounted to $271,864.
The court's final orders included specific awards for non-economic loss, psychiatric impairment, lost earning capacity, future and past medical expenses, and superannuation benefits, all in accordance with the statutory framework and the facts of the case.
Orders
Orders of the court
Held:
(1) Damages for non-economic loss are assessed under s 52(3) of the Civil Liability Act 1936 on the basis that the injury to the applicant’s right shoulder is the dominant injury of her multiple injuries and the applicable ISV item number is 92.2 with a range of 6 to 10. To reflect the level of adverse impact of her multiple injuries, it is appropriate for the ISV for her dominant injury to be higher than the maximum of 10. The ISV is increased by 25% and rounded up to a whole number, 13, resulting in an award of damages for non-economic loss of $5,200.
(2) The expert medical diagnosis of the applicant’s psychiatric condition arising from the accident (PTSD) and GEPIC rating for psychiatric impairment provided in a GEPIC report under regs 14 and 23 of the Civil Liability Regulations 2013 are to be accepted.
(3) The applicant’s PTSD arising from the accident is the primary impairment to her earning capacity. The residual disabilities arising from the applicant’s physical injuries have otherwise been accommodated and do not adversely impact her earning capacity for a higher earning sedentary role.
(4) The applicant’s PTSD arising from the accident has not deprived her of the opportunity to complete her university degree or to progress to more senior technical or analytical roles given her demonstrated capacity to perform the role of a credit assessor at a high level.
(5) As a result of the applicant’s PTSD, she is unlikely to fulfil the requirements of a more senior position involving people management. In accordance with s 56A of the Civil Liability Act 1936, it is appropriate to assess her lost earning capacity as the difference between her current salary as a credit assessor and what she would have earned as a permanent team leader. Using the agreed discount multiplier and a 15% discount for the usual vicissitudes of life, the award for loss of future earning capacity is $172,545 and for past economic loss is $21,624. These assessments include the statutory discount of 20% under s 56(5). Loss of past and future superannuation benefits are assessed at $2,054 and $20,200 respectively, both including the statutory discount of 20% under s 56(5).
(6) It is appropriate in the circumstances found to make an award for future medical expenses, allowing for psychology, physiotherapy and surgery costs, of $21,000, and for future services and equipment of $26,250.
(7) Agreed past medical expenses are $2,991.
(8) The Applicant is awarded damages in the amount of $271,864 plus interest.
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.