Tsueneaki v Stewart

[2013] ACTCA 34

AOKI TSUENEAKI v ROD STEWART
[2013] ACTCA 34 (19 August 2013)

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – practice and procedure – application to admit new or late evidence – inevitable delay – considered Aon Risk Services Australia Limited v Australian National University (2009) 239 CLR 175 – prejudice of substantial delay and wasted costs to parties and other litigants – evidence rightly rejected – appeal dismissed
APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – delay in delivering judgment – no indication of loss of advantage of seeing and hearing witness – no deprivation to defendant of forensic advantage otherwise enjoyed – appeal dismissed
APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – alleged error in determining economic loss – “possibility” not certainty of early retirement enforced by future disability – submitted that “buffer” value excessive – award deemed reasonable in circumstances – appeal dismissed

Court Procedure Rules 2006 (ACT)

Aon Risk Services Australia Limited v Australian National University [2009] HCA 27 (5 August 2009); (2009) 239 CLR 175
Theodorelos v Nexus Projects Pty Ltd [2009] ACTSC 149 (6 November 2009)
Medlin v State Government Insurance Commission [1995] HCA 5; (1995) 182 CLR 1
Pollard v Baulderstone Hornibrook Engineering Pty Ltd [2008] NSWCA 99
O’Brien v Noble [2012] ACTCA 13
Malec v J C Hutton Pty Ltd [1990] HCA 20; (1990) 169 CLR 638

ON APPEAL FROM THE MASTER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

No. ACTCA 43 - 2012
No. SC 187 of 2009

Judges:        Higgins CJ, Burns and Gilmour JJ
Court of Appeal of the Australian Capital Territory
Date:           19 August 2013

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE     )          No. ACTCA 43 - 2012
  )          No. SC 187 of 2009
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY           )
  )

COURT OF APPEAL  )

ON APPEAL FROM THE MASTER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

BETWEEN:AOKI TSUENEAKI

Appellant

AND:ROD STEWART

Respondent

ORDER

Judges:  Higgins CJ, Burns and Gilmour JJ
Date:  19 August 2013
Place:  Canberra

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The appeal be dismissed with costs.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE     )          No. ACTCA 43 - 2012
  )          No. SC 187 of 2009
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY           )
  )

COURT OF APPEAL  )

ON APPEAL FROM THE MASTER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

BETWEEN:AOKI TSUENEAKI

Appellant

AND:ROD STEWART

Respondent

Judges:  Higgins CJ, Burns and Gilmour JJ
Date:  19 August 2013
Place:  Canberra

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

THE COURT:

1. This is an appeal from a decision of Master Harper handed down on 24 August 2012.  His Honour ordered the entry of judgment for the plaintiff, Rod Stewart, the current respondent, in the sum of $336,646.00.

1. The grounds of appeal as amended on 17 October 2012 are stated to be:

1.3       the grounds of appeal are:

(a)the court below erred in law by denying procedural fairness in that it failed to give proper, genuine and realistic consideration of the evidence in assessing damages for general damages, interest on general damages, loss of earning capacity, loss of superannuation benefits and deprived…