Small v FAI Insurance Co Ltd
Case
•
[1995] QSC 121
•22 June 1995
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Small v FAI Insurance Co Ltd [1995] QSC 121
[1995] QSC 121
22 June 1995
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the Supreme Court of Queensland, Andrew Wallace Small sued FAI General Insurance Company Limited for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident. The defendant admitted liability but disputed the extent of the plaintiff's damages and argued contributory negligence due to the plaintiff's alleged failure to wear a seatbelt. The plaintiff, who suffered from post-traumatic retrograde amnesia, could not recall if he wore the seatbelt. The court had to determine if the defendant had proven contributory negligence and the quantum of damages.
The court found that the defendant had not discharged the onus of proving contributory negligence as there was insufficient evidence to establish that the plaintiff was not wearing the seatbelt or that this omission contributed to his injuries. The court considered the plaintiff's pre-accident career trajectory in the hospitality industry, his injuries, and their impact on his future earning capacity. The court assessed the plaintiff's past and future economic losses, non-economic damages, and special damages such as medical costs and future treatment needs. The court awarded the plaintiff $429,380.50 in damages.
The court's final orders included awarding the plaintiff $429,380.50 in damages and directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs of the action, subject to taxation.
The court found that the defendant had not discharged the onus of proving contributory negligence as there was insufficient evidence to establish that the plaintiff was not wearing the seatbelt or that this omission contributed to his injuries. The court considered the plaintiff's pre-accident career trajectory in the hospitality industry, his injuries, and their impact on his future earning capacity. The court assessed the plaintiff's past and future economic losses, non-economic damages, and special damages such as medical costs and future treatment needs. The court awarded the plaintiff $429,380.50 in damages.
The court's final orders included awarding the plaintiff $429,380.50 in damages and directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs of the action, subject to taxation.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Litigation & Procedure
-
Tort Law
Legal Concepts
-
Breach of Contract
-
Causation
-
Negligence
-
Contributory Negligence
-
Compensatory Damages
-
Specific Performance
-
Res Judicata
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0