Robinson v Heslop (Formerly Hanson)

The parties to this appeal were the appellant, Robinson, and the respondent, Heslop (formerly Hanson). The dispute concerned the quantum of damages awarded to the respondent for personal injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. The appeal was heard by Beazley and Ipp JJA in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the trial judge erred in assessing the respondent's future economic loss by treating him as an employee rather than self-employed, whether the Court of Appeal should admit new evidence regarding the respondent's earning capacity, and whether the overall award of damages was excessive. The Court also considered the application of the *Jones v Dunkel* inference in circumstances where evidence was not adduced by the respondent.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. It found that the trial judge's assessment of the respondent as an employee for the purposes of future economic loss was open to him on the evidence presented at trial. The Court declined to admit new evidence on appeal, noting that the respondent had failed to adduce this evidence at trial and that its admission was not necessary for the proper determination of the appeal. Furthermore, the Court held that the *Jones v Dunkel* inference was not applicable in this instance. Consequently, the Court concluded that the award of damages was not excessive. The appeal was dismissed with costs.