Ridd v James Cook University (No.2)

In *Ridd v James Cook University (No.2)*, heard in the Federal Court of Australia, the dispute concerned the assessment of compensation for Dr. Ridd, following his successful claim for breach of contract and misleading and deceptive conduct against James Cook University. The proceedings before Judge Vasta were specifically focused on quantifying the economic loss suffered by Dr. Ridd and determining appropriate penalties.

The court was required to determine the extent of Dr. Ridd's past and future economic loss, taking into account the principle of "vicissitudes" which allows for adjustments to reflect the uncertainties of life and career. Additionally, the court had to assess general damages and consider Dr. Ridd's post-judgment behaviour in its calculations. The assessment of pecuniary penalties for the university's contraventions of the Australian Consumer Law was also a key issue.

Judge Vasta reasoned that the assessment of economic loss must be a realistic appraisal of Dr. Ridd's likely earnings and career progression, adjusted for contingencies. The court applied established principles for assessing damages, including the need to avoid double recovery and to ensure compensation reflects the actual loss suffered. The consideration of post-judgment conduct was relevant to the overall assessment of the university's culpability and the appropriate quantum of damages and penalties. The court ultimately made orders for the payment of compensation and penalties by James Cook University to Dr. Ridd.