Wallace v Nominal Defendant

[2005] QDC 6

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Wallace v Nominal Defendant & Ors [2005] QDC 006

PARTIES:

DONNA MAREE WALLACE  (Plaintiff)

and

NOMINAL DEFENDANT  (First Defendant)
and
MATTHEW JOHN HODGE                (Second Defendant)
and
DEBRA ANNE ARNOTT  (Third Defendant)

FILE NO/S:

79/03

DIVISION:

Civil jurisdiction

PROCEEDING:

Claim for damages for personal injury in motor vehicle accident

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court, Southport

DELIVERED ON:

27 January 2005

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

2, 3 December 2004, written submissions 13,
23 December 2004

JUDGE:

Judge Robin QC

ORDER:

Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendants for $39,850.35.

CATCHWORDS:

PERSONAL INJURIES – ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES – plaintiff suffered 5% whole body impairment after whiplash injury – significance of previous motor vehicle accident leading to neck problems and of pre-existing degeneration considered – plaintiff lacked expert support for her asserted incapacity to work – plaintiff not working at time of accident – attempts to rejoin workforce considered desultory – only limited awards for loss of past and future earnings were appropriate – Griffths v Kerkemeyer claim for services not commencing until more than 20 months after the injury rejected

COUNSEL:

Mr J. R Webb for the plaintiff
Mr M. T O’Sullivan for the defendants

SOLICITORS:

Gall Standfield Smith for the plaintiff
Phillips Fox for the defendants

1. The plaintiff who was born on 20 November 1963 was injured in a motor vehicle accident which happened about 9.50 am on 20 November 2000.  (The sad coincidence of dates is “confirmed” by Exhibit 4D and Exhibit 24 at least.)  She was a passenger in a rented vehicle being driven by her sister northbound in the right hand lane of the Pacific Highway at Mudgeeraba.  The other vehicle in the collision was travelling northbound in the left hand lane.  According to the statement of claim (which gives a somewhat clearer version than those attributed to the plaintiff in various reports before the court) an unidentified white van entered the highway at Mudgeeraba from the left hand side of the carriageway, causing the vehicle in the left hand lane to move across to the right, where it came into collision with the vehicle in which the plaintiff was riding.  The driver lost control; the vehicle came to rest when it rammed backwards into a tree on the median strip.  The first defendant represents the white van, the third defendant was the plaintiff’s sister; the second defendant was the driver of the vehicle which moved across into the right hand lane.  Liability has been admitted and the defendants, represented by Mr O’Sullivan, made common cause in the trial, in which the plaintiff was represented by Mr Webb.

1. It is a “whiplash” case, in which the plaintiff’s complaint is of soft tissue injury not demonstrated by radiological evidence.  There is the usual difference of opinion among medical experts as to whether the conditions of which the plaintiff complains can still, more than four years after the accident, be attributed to it. The defendants acknowledge there was some soft tissue injury, which they say should…