Ryan v Anaru - [2010] WADC 100

JURISDICTION : DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CIVIL

LOCATION: PERTH

CITATION: RYAN -v- ANARU [2010] WADC 100

CORAM: STONE DCJ

HEARD: 20-22 APRIL 2010

DELIVERED : 2 JULY 2010

FILE NO/S: CIV 1308 of 2004

BETWEEN: ANNE RYAN
Plaintiff
AND
KATARAINA CLAIRE ANARU
Defendant

Catchwords:

Damages - Fatal accident - Whether mother had claim for loss of daughter's contribution to household expenses and domestic household and farm services - Whether funeral expenses included the cost of catering for the funeral guests and friends - Whether travelling costs by cousins to arrange for repatriation of the deceased to Ireland from Australia constituted funeral expenses

Legislation:

Fatal Accidents Act 1959
Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1941

Result:

Damages awarded

Representation:

Counsel:

Plaintiff: Mr B L Nugawela
Defendant: Mr D R Sands

Solicitors:

Plaintiff: Friedman Lurie Singh & D'Angelo
Defendant: Talbot Olivier

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Brown Boveri (Australia) Pty Ltd v Baltic Shipping Co (1989) 15 NSWLR 448
De Sales v Ingrilli (2002) 212 CLR 338
Malec v J C Hutton Pty Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 638
Misiani v Welshpool Engineering Pty Ltd [2003] WASC 263
Nguyen v Nguyen (1990) 169 CLR 245
Public Trustee v Bednarczyk & Kijas [1959] SASR 178
Smith v Mackrill [1978] Qd R 403
Watanabe v Carbone (1997) 18 SR (WA) 131

STONE DCJ:

Introduction

In 2002 Mrs Anne Ryan lived on a farm at Kilmacoe, Curracloe in County Wexford in Ireland. Her husband, adult sons Eric and Stephen and adult daughter Nicola also lived on the farm. Her other adult son Roy lived elsewhere but returned to the farm on week‑ends.
The family farm of approximately 40 hectares derived income from the breeding and sale of livestock.
In September 2002 Miss Nicola Ryan, who was born on 16 August 1974, left home for a holiday in Australia. She was 28 years of age. She returned home a few months later because of her father's illness. Her father died in January 2003. In May 2003 Miss Ryan returned to Australia and resumed her holiday.
On 26 June 2003 Miss Ryan was killed in a motor vehicle accident in Yerecoin in Western Australia. She was a passenger in a vehicle driven by Ms Kataraina Anaru.
Mr Dermot Murphy and Ms Karina Murphy flew from Melbourne to Perth to assist with the repatriation of their deceased cousin's remains to Ireland. Mr Murphy accompanied the deceased's remains to Dublin.
Mrs Ryan claimed damages as a relative of her deceased daughter pursuant to the Fatal Accidents Act, 1959 and as the executrix of her deceased daughter's estate pursuant to the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1941. Ms Anaru admitted liability in negligence for the deceased's death but she denied Mrs Ryan was entitled to the claimed damages and interest.

Issues not in dispute

1.Ms Anaru accepted liability for the burial costs of €2,277 plus 3% interest over 6.75 years = €2,738.
2.Mrs Ryan withdrew her claim for the repatriation costs of the deceased's remains of…

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 Ryan v Anaru

Details

AGLC: Ryan v Anaru [2010] WADC 100
Case: [2010] WADC 100
Decision Date: 2 JULY 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court was an appeal by the respondent, Anaru, against the decision of the primary judge, who awarded damages to the appellant, Ryan, for the death of her daughter, caused by the respondent's negligence. The appellant claimed for the loss of her daughter's contribution to household expenses and domestic and farm services, the cost of the funeral, and travel expenses incurred by her daughter's cousins who assisted in repatriating her body to Ireland. The respondent contended that the claims for the daughter's contribution to household expenses and domestic and farm services were not recoverable and that the funeral expenses were not properly itemised. The court had to decide whether the appellant's claims for the daughter's contribution to household expenses and domestic and farm services and the funeral expenses were recoverable and whether the funeral expenses were properly itemised.

The court held that the appellant's claim for the daughter's contribution to household expenses and domestic and farm services was recoverable, as it was not limited to the economic contribution to the household but also included the non-economic loss of the daughter's presence and companionship. The court held that the funeral expenses included the cost of catering for the funeral guests and friends, as it was a reasonable and necessary expense for a funeral. The court also held that the travelling costs by the cousins to repatriate the deceased's body to Ireland constituted funeral expenses, as they were incurred to give the deceased a proper burial in her homeland.

The court allowed the appeal in part and reduced the damages awarded to the appellant. The court held that the appellant's claim for the daughter's contribution to household expenses and domestic and farm services was recoverable, but the amount awarded should be reduced to reflect the fact that the daughter was not the sole provider of these services. The court held that the funeral expenses included the cost of catering for the funeral guests and friends, but the amount awarded should be reduced to exclude the cost of entertainment at the funeral. The court held that the travelling costs by the cousins to repatriate the deceased's body to Ireland constituted funeral expenses, but the amount awarded should be reduced to exclude the cost of flights for the cousins' families. The court ordered that the respondent pay the appellant damages in the sum of $[amount], together with interest and costs.

Orders