Mead v Kerney [2012] NSWCA 215

Mead v Kerney [2012] NSWCA 215

The appeal and cross-appeal should be dismissed as the respondent's theoretical residual earning capacity had no practical value, and the method and assumptions used by the primary judge in calculating economic loss and retirement age were correct and supported by evidence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['economic Loss' 'assessment of Earning Capacity' 'estimation of Lost Earnings']
['damages' 'personal Injury'] ['economic Loss' 'assessment of Earning Capacity' 'estimation of Lost Earnings']

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

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the respondent's theoretical residual earning capacity had practical value in his local labour market" 'Appropriate method for estimating lost earnings if uninjured' 'Assumption of retirement age in calculation of future economic loss']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal and cross-appeal should be dismissed as the respondent's theoretical residual earning capacity had no practical value, and the method and assumptions used by the primary judge in calculating economic loss and retirement age were correct and supported by evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Both appeal and cross-appeal are dismissed with costs.']