Jenkin,Trevor Robert & Ors trading as Calomba Transport v Muir, Steven Paul [1982] FCA 110

Jenkin,Trevor Robert & Ors trading as Calomba Transport v Muir, Steven Paul [1982] FCA 110

Although the trial judge's reasons on the challenged heads of damage were meagre, the evidence showed that the respondent had lost the capacity to work as a general rigger, had paid substantial amounts for substitute labour for work he otherwise would have done, and would probably need to continue employing others to perform rigging work. The increasing profitability of his business did not remove that loss. Applying the principle that assessment of future economic loss is a matter of judgment rather than mathematical calculation, the Court was not satisfied that the awards of $10,000 for past impairment after 1 October 1979 and $95,000 for future economic loss were excessive.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 June 1982
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Negligence Damages Appeal / Appeal From the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory of Australia Limited to Quantum of Damages
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['quantum of Damages' 'impairment of Earning Capacity' 'future Economic Loss' 'assessment of Damages' 'substitute Labour Costs']
['tort Law' 'personal Injury' 'damages'] ['quantum of Damages' 'impairment of Earning Capacity' 'future Economic Loss' 'assessment of Damages' 'substitute Labour Costs']

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 From the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory of Australia Limited to Quantum of Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the awards of $10,000 for impairment of working capacity from 1 October 1979 to the date of judgment and $95,000 for future economic loss were unsupported by evidence or excessive.' "How damages for impairment of earning capacity should be assessed where precise calculation of the respondent's business income and losses was not possible."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although the trial judge's reasons on the challenged heads of damage were meagre, the evidence showed that the respondent had lost the capacity to work as a general rigger, had paid substantial amounts for substitute labour for work he otherwise would have done, and would probably need to continue employing others to perform rigging work. The increasing profitability of his business did not remove that loss. Applying the principle that assessment of future economic loss is a matter of judgment rather than mathematical calculation, the Court was not satisfied that the awards of $10,000 for past impairment after 1 October 1979 and $95,000 for future economic loss were excessive.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed with costs.']