Ryrie v Tanner (No 2)

[2020] ACTSC 104

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:

Ryrie v Tanner (No 2)

Citation:

[2020] ACTSC 104

Hearing Dates:

20–22 April 2020

DecisionDate:

1 May 2020

Before:

Murrell CJ

Decision:

Judgment is entered for the plaintiff in the sum of $370,501. See [126]–[135].

Catchwords:

DAMAGES – PERSONAL INJURY – Motor vehicle accident – Spinal injury – Pre-existing condition in spine – Whether the accident rendered the pre-existing condition symptomatic – Whether spinal fusion surgery reasonable – Damages for economic and non-economic loss, past and future expenses, and voluntary assistance

Cases Cited:

Cressy v Miloriad [2016] ACTSC 303

Gibson v Steinhoff Asia Pacific Ltd [2012] ACTSC 139
Griffiths v Kerkemeyer (1977) 139 CLR 161
Lewis v Woolworths [2018] ACTSC 200
Lumley v Sainsbury [2017] ACTSC 40
Malec v J C Hutton Pty Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 638
Massouras v Kone Elevators Pty Ltd [2020] ACTSC 66
Pidcock v Milosis [2019] ACTSC 209
Purkess v Crittenden (1965) 114 CLR 164
Seltsam Pty Ltd v Ghaleb [2005] NSWCA 208

Thom v Carle [2014] ACTSC 4

Parties:

Nyssah Ryrie (Plaintiff)

Pat Tanner (First Defendant)

Insurance Australia Ltd trading as NRMA Insurance (Second Defendant)

Representation:

Counsel

S Whybrow (Plaintiff)

M Nesbeth (First and Second Defendants)

Solicitors

Baker Deane & Nutt (Plaintiff)

HWL Ebsworth Lawyers (First and Second Defendants)

File Number(s):

SC 352 of 2019

MURRELL CJ:

Introduction

1. The plaintiff claimed damages for injuries and disabilities (primarily, lower back pain) that she sustained in a motor vehicle accident on 17 August 2015.  The first defendant was the driver of the motor vehicle that was responsible for the accident.  The second defendant is the compulsory third party insurer of that vehicle. 

1. Liability was admitted.

1. At the time of the accident, the plaintiff was a healthy 28-year-old woman.  She was employed as an IT consultant.  She was in a de facto relationship with Mr de Flumeri.

1. After leaving school in Year 11, the plaintiff commenced a hairdressing apprenticeship, worked in the retail industry and then joined the public service.  Ultimately, she became an IT consultant, working for Fujitsu Australia (until 2016), Leidos Australia (from 2016 to 2019) and for Optus Australia (from 2019 to 2020).

1. In 2018, she took seven months’ maternity leave; her daughter was born in October 2018.  In 2019/2020, she took six months’ maternity leave; her son was born in November 2019.  In early May 2020, she will return to full-time employment at Leidos Australia, earning approximately $175,000 per annum. 

The accident and its aftermath

1. At about 1:30 PM on 17 August 2015, the plaintiff was driving her Volvo motor vehicle north along Melrose Drive, Philip.  The first defendant was driving a Subaru Forrester vehicle east along Theodore Street towards an intersection with Melrose Drive.

1. At the intersection, the first defendant’s vehicle failed to give way to the plaintiff’s vehicle and collided with it.  The plaintiff had been travelling at about 60 km/h.  The force of the collision caused the airbags of her vehicle to deploy.  The vehicle could not be driven from…