Soogyung Kim v Xiaoxia Liu - [2017] QDC 167

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Soogyung Kim v Xiaoxia Liu & Anor [2017] QDC 167

PARTIES:

SOOGYUNG KIM

Plaintiff

v

XIAOXIA LIU

First Defendant

and

ALLIANZ AUSTRALIA INSURANCE LIMITED

Second Defendant

FILE NO/S:

4120/16

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Trial

DELIVERED ON:

21 June 2017

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

29 and 30 May 2017

JUDGE:

Bowskill QC DCJ

ORDER:

1. Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendants for general damages of $8,910, plus interest on general damages (with the rate and amount of interest to be agreed between the parties), plus out of pocket expenses of $891.97, plus future medication costs of $500.00.

2. Direct that the parties provide a form of judgment, reflecting these reasons, and also as to costs, if the parties are agreed, within 7 days. If there is no agreement as to the appropriate costs order, each party is to provide brief submissions (no more than 3 pages), and any affidavit material, in support of the costs order they seek, within 7 days, and the matter will be decided on the papers

CATCHWORDS:

DAMAGES – Personal Injuries – Quantum –– Where the plaintiff was injured in a car accident – Liability admitted - Dispute as to the consequences of the injuries caused by the car accident – Whether the plaintiff has suffered or will suffer loss of earnings as a result of the accident caused injuries

Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) s 55
Civil Liability Regulation 2014 (Qld)

Allianz Australia Insurance Limited v McCarthy [2012] QCA 312
Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336
Brown v New South Wales Trustee and Guardian [2012] NSWCA 431
Malec v JC Hutton Pty Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 638
Medlin v State Government Insurance Commission (1995) 182 CLR 1
Nichols v Curtis [2010] QCA 303
Nucifora & Anor v AAI Ltd [2013] QSC 338
Perfect v McDonald [2012] QSC 11

COUNSEL:

R Green for the Plaintiff

N Jarro for the Second and Third Defendants

SOLICITORS:

Park & Co Lawyers for the Plaintiff

McInnes Wilson Lawyers for the Second and Third Defendants

Introduction

Ms Soogyung Kim was a passenger in a car which was involved in an accident on 22 July 2015. She was almost 25 at the time. The car was driven by the first defendant, and covered by a policy of insurance with the second defendant. By this proceeding, Ms Kim seeks to recover damages for injuries she says she suffered in that accident, and consequential other losses. It is admitted the accident was caused by the first defendant’s negligence. The issues in dispute in this matter are:
(a)the nature and extent of any injury suffered by Ms Kim as a result of the accident; and
(b)what damages ought to be awarded to Ms Kim.

The nature and extent of injury suffered by Ms Kim as a result of the accident

Although the defendants initially denied that Ms Kim suffered any injury in the accident, that position was not maintained at the trial. Having regard to the following evidence that…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Soogyung Kim v Xiaoxia Liu and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2017] QDC 167
Decision Date: 21 June 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Soogyung Kim versus Xiaoxia Liu involved the plaintiff, Soogyung Kim, who claimed damages for personal injuries sustained in a car accident caused by the defendant, Xiaoxia Liu. The case was heard in a lower court in Australia where liability had already been admitted by the defendant. The primary dispute centered on the extent of the injuries and their consequences, specifically whether the plaintiff had suffered or would suffer a loss of earnings as a result of the accident.

The legal issues the court needed to decide included the assessment of general damages for the plaintiff’s injuries and the quantification of these damages, including the impact on her ability to earn income. The court also had to consider the plaintiff’s out-of-pocket expenses and future medical costs. The plaintiff argued that she had suffered significant physical and emotional injuries which impeded her capacity to work, while the defendant conceded liability but contested the severity and financial impact of the injuries claimed.

In delivering the judgment, the court carefully examined the evidence provided, including medical reports and expert testimonies. It concluded that the plaintiff had indeed suffered from significant injuries that affected her ability to work, leading to a loss of earnings. The court awarded the plaintiff general damages of $8,910, interest on these damages, out-of-pocket expenses of $891.97, and future medication costs of $500.00. The court provided directions for the parties to finalise the form of judgment and the costs order within a specified timeframe, allowing for any disagreements to be addressed through written submissions.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendants for general damages of $8,910, plus interest on general damages (with the rate and amount of interest to be agreed between the parties), plus out of pocket expenses of $891.97, plus future medication costs of $500.00.

2. Direct that the parties provide a form of judgment, reflecting these reasons, and also as to costs, if the parties are agreed, within 7 days. If there is no agreement as to the appropriate costs order, each party is to provide brief submissions (no more than 3 pages), and any affidavit material, in support of the costs order they seek, within 7 days, and the matter will be decided on the papers

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	Soogyung Kim v Xiaoxia Liu & Anor [2017] QDC 167
PARTIES:	SOOGYUNG KIM Plaintiff v XIAOXIA LIU First Defendant and ALLIANZ AUSTRALIA INSURANCE LIMITED Second Defendant
FILE NO/S:	4120/16
DIVISION:	Civil
PROCEEDING:	Trial
DELIVERED ON:	21 June 2017
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	29 and 30 May 2017
JUDGE:	Bowskill QC DCJ
ORDER:	1. Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendants for general damages of $8,910, plus interest on general damages (with the rate and amount of interest to be agreed between the parties), plus out of pocket expenses of $891.97, plus future medication costs of $500.00. 2. Direct that the parties provide a form of judgment, reflecting these reasons, and also as to costs, if the parties are agreed, within 7 days. If there is no agreement as to the appropriate costs order, each party is to provide brief submissions (no more than 3 pages), and any affidavit material, in support of the costs order they seek, within 7 days, and the matter will be decided on the papers
CATCHWORDS:	DAMAGES – Personal Injuries – Quantum –– Where the plaintiff was injured in a car accident – Liability admitted - Dispute as to the consequences of the injuries caused by the car accident – Whether the plaintiff has suffered or will suffer loss of earnings as a result of the accident caused injuries Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) s 55 Civil Liability Regulation 2014 (Qld) Allianz Australia Insurance Limited v McCarthy [2012] QCA 312 Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336 Brown v New South Wales Trustee and Guardian [2012] NSWCA 431 Malec v JC Hutton Pty Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 638 Medlin v State Government Insurance Commission (1995) 182 CLR 1 Nichols v Curtis [2010] QCA 303 Nucifora & Anor v AAI Ltd [2013] QSC 338 Perfect v McDonald [2012] QSC 11
COUNSEL:	R Green for the Plaintiff N Jarro for the Second and Third Defendants
SOLICITORS:	Park & Co Lawyers for the Plaintiff McInnes Wilson Lawyers for the Second and Third Defendants