CONNOR v HATGIS [1995] NSWCA 91

CONNOR v HATGIS [1995] NSWCA 91

The trial judge erred by under-assessing the plaintiff’s likely average working hours per week, leading to an under-estimate of both past and future economic loss; on the evidence, an average of twenty hours per week was appropriate. The appellate court was entitled to intervene because the trial judge confined assessment to objective work history and there was no reliance on subjective impression or credibility.

Parties
Appellant: Connor; Respondent: Hatgis
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 September 1995
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Assessment of Damages, Past Economic Loss, Future Economic Loss, Standard of Appellate Review
Damages Personal Injury Law Assessment of Damages Past Economic Loss Future Economic Loss Standard of Appellate Review

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Connor

Appellant

Hatgis

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in assessing past and future economic loss by underestimating the plaintiff's likely working hours and earnings but for the injury
  2. 2 Whether the Court of Appeal is justified in interfering with the trial judge's assessment of damages

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred by under-assessing the plaintiff’s likely average working hours per week, leading to an under-estimate of both past and future economic loss; on the evidence, an average of twenty hours per week was appropriate. The appellate court was entitled to intervene because the trial judge confined assessment to objective work history and there was no reliance on subjective impression or credibility.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Set aside the judgment of Studdert J in the Common Law Division of the Supreme Court
  • Enter judgment for $194,009.58 in lieu, effective from 20 June 1994