CLEMENTSON v TIMMER [1990] NSWCA 45

CLEMENTSON v TIMMER [1990] NSWCA 45

Proper analysis of the evidence and the cases presented at trial indicated no duplication of compensation between the personal injury claim and the dependency claim under the Compensation to Relatives Act. The trial judge correctly avoided double counting by deducting appropriate amounts for the respondent's contribution to the business and only compensated economic loss attributable to the husband's death. Future dependency should be recalculated at 70%, reducing the award under the Act.

Parties
Appellant: Clementson; Respondent: Timmer (Robyn Lynette Timmer); Appellant: Government Insurance Office of New South Wales
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 December 1990
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed in personal injuries claim; appeal allowed in compensation claim. Orders as detailed.
Legal Topics
Damages, Double Compensation, Economic Loss, Dependency, Assessment of Damages
Torts Personal Injury Motor Vehicle Accidents Damages Double Compensation Economic Loss Dependency Assessment 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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 18
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Clementson

Appellant

Timmer (Robyn Lynette Timmer)

Respondent

Government Insurance Office of New South Wales

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was duplication or over-compensation in damages awards due to overlapping remedies for personal injury and dependency under the Compensation to Relatives Act 1897.
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in calculating economic loss and dependency percentage for future loss.
  3. 3 Whether the amounts awarded for general damages and loss of housekeeping capacity were disproportionate.

Ratio Decidendi

Proper analysis of the evidence and the cases presented at trial indicated no duplication of compensation between the personal injury claim and the dependency claim under the Compensation to Relatives Act. The trial judge correctly avoided double counting by deducting appropriate amounts for the respondent's contribution to the business and only compensated economic loss attributable to the husband's death. Future dependency should be recalculated at 70%, reducing the award under the Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed in personal injuries claim; appeal allowed in compensation claim. Orders as detailed.

Orders

  • In proceeding Number 18765/82 (personal injuries claim): appeal dismissed with costs.
  • In proceeding 10839/83 (Compensation to Relatives Act claim): appeal allowed.