Wilkinson v Campton

The appeal concerned the quantum of damages awarded to the respondent, Mr. Wilkinson, following an admitted duty of care and breach of that duty by the appellant, Campton. While the appellant initially pleaded contributory negligence, this issue was abandoned on appeal. The primary judge had found no contributory negligence and awarded damages to the respondent, which the appellant sought to reduce.

The central legal issue before the court was the assessment of the quantum of damages, specifically concerning future expenses. The respondent, a young man who had sustained injuries to his neck and lower back in the accident, had demonstrated a strong work ethic and a desire to remain in the workforce despite ongoing pain. The primary judge had awarded $18,500 for future expenses, comprising $14,000 for future physiotherapy and $4,500 for annual medical reviews.

The court considered conflicting medical evidence regarding the respondent's injuries and prognosis. The respondent's medical experts, including Dr. Miller and Dr. Davis, supported the existence of disc protrusions and annular tears, indicating ongoing pain and limitations that would necessitate future treatment. In contrast, the appellant's expert, Professor Ehrlich, opined that the respondent had minimal symptomatology, no objective abnormalities, and was fit for heavy physical work, suggesting that radiological findings of disc bulging were common and not necessarily attributable to the accident or a source of ongoing disability. The primary judge, having found the respondent to be a truthful and honest witness who underplayed his injuries, accepted the respondent's evidence and the opinions of his medical experts.

The appeal was dismissed with costs. The court upheld the primary judge's assessment of damages, including the award for future expenses, finding that the evidence supported the need for ongoing physiotherapy and medical reviews to manage the respondent's pain and maintain his capacity for work.