Dare v Pulham [1982] HCA 70

Dare v Pulham [1982] HCA 70

The jury's assessment of damages could not be set aside merely because it exceeded the amount suggested by the particulars or counsel's submissions. The particulars gave notice of the appellant's destroyed earning capacity and intended working life, the evidence supporting a higher loss was admitted without objection and was not open to objection, there was no abandonment of the claim, and the issue of general damages was submitted to the jury at large without demur. No established ground for interfering with the jury verdict was shown.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Negligence Damages Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave to the High Court of Australia From the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs; judgment of the trial judge restored.
Legal Topics
['personal Injury Damages' 'loss of Earning Capacity' 'contributory Negligence' 'pleadings and Particulars' 'jury Verdicts' 'appellate Review of Damages']
['torts' 'civil Procedure' 'damages'] ['personal Injury Damages' 'loss of Earning Capacity' 'contributory Negligence' 'pleadings and Particulars' 'jury Verdicts' 'appellate Review of Damages']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Negligence Damages Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave to the High Court of Australia From the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the jury's assessment of damages could be set aside because it exceeded or was inconsistent with particulars of loss of earning capacity and counsel's address at trial." 'Whether evidence admitted without objection and capable of supporting a higher assessment of damages could sustain the jury verdict.' "Whether the respondent had been deprived of a substantial right by the appellant's particulars or conduct of the trial."]

Ratio Decidendi

The jury's assessment of damages could not be set aside merely because it exceeded the amount suggested by the particulars or counsel's submissions. The particulars gave notice of the appellant's destroyed earning capacity and intended working life, the evidence supporting a higher loss was admitted without objection and was not open to objection, there was no abandonment of the claim, and the issue of general damages was submitted to the jury at large without demur. No established ground for interfering with the jury verdict was shown.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs; judgment of the trial judge restored.

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed with costs.' 'Judgment of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria varied by setting aside the orders in respect of the appeal to that Court and instead order that the appeal be dismissed with costs.']