Ramm v Fletcher
Case
•
[1995] QSC 212
•25 August 1995
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Ramm v Fletcher [1995] QSC 212
[1995] QSC 212
25 August 1995
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Supreme Court of Queensland was tasked with assessing damages for a personal injury claim brought by Svantje Ramm, who was injured in a motor vehicle accident on 5 March 1990. The defendant by election admitted liability, leaving only the assessment of quantum to be determined. The plaintiff sustained various injuries, including a closed head injury, multiple fractures, and a visual field defect in her right eye. The court had to consider the extent of the plaintiff's injuries, her recovery, and the impact on her life, including her ability to work and her ongoing medical needs.
The court examined the plaintiff's medical history and the various treatments she received. It noted that while the plaintiff had made a good physical recovery from her injuries, she continued to experience headaches, depression, and other psychological effects. The court also considered the evidence of multiple medical experts, who provided differing opinions on the nature and prognosis of the plaintiff's conditions. The court found that the plaintiff's headaches and other symptoms were largely influenced by psychological factors, such as anxiety and stress, rather than solely due to the physical injuries.
In assessing damages, the court awarded sums for pain and suffering, loss of amenities, past and future economic loss, special damages, and future medical treatment. The court rejected some of the plaintiff's claims for increased telephone expenses and certain physiotherapy treatments, finding that these were either not necessitated by the accident or were provided in excess of what was necessary. The court also disallowed a claim for assistance under the Griffiths v. Kerkemeyer principle, finding that the evidence did not support the claimed hours of assistance.
The total award amounted to $239,723.93, which included compensation for pain and suffering, economic loss, special damages, and future medical treatment. The court ordered that judgment be entered for the plaintiff against the defendant by election for this amount.
The court examined the plaintiff's medical history and the various treatments she received. It noted that while the plaintiff had made a good physical recovery from her injuries, she continued to experience headaches, depression, and other psychological effects. The court also considered the evidence of multiple medical experts, who provided differing opinions on the nature and prognosis of the plaintiff's conditions. The court found that the plaintiff's headaches and other symptoms were largely influenced by psychological factors, such as anxiety and stress, rather than solely due to the physical injuries.
In assessing damages, the court awarded sums for pain and suffering, loss of amenities, past and future economic loss, special damages, and future medical treatment. The court rejected some of the plaintiff's claims for increased telephone expenses and certain physiotherapy treatments, finding that these were either not necessitated by the accident or were provided in excess of what was necessary. The court also disallowed a claim for assistance under the Griffiths v. Kerkemeyer principle, finding that the evidence did not support the claimed hours of assistance.
The total award amounted to $239,723.93, which included compensation for pain and suffering, economic loss, special damages, and future medical treatment. The court ordered that judgment be entered for the plaintiff against the defendant by election for this amount.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Personal Injury Law
-
Insurance Law
Legal Concepts
-
Compensatory Damages
-
Special Damages
-
Future Economic Loss
-
Past Economic Loss
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Ramm v Fletcher [1995] QSC 212
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0