CSR LTD v JAN BOUWHUIS [1991] NSWCA 295

CSR LTD v JAN BOUWHUIS [1991] NSWCA 295

The appeal was dismissed because the Court found that tender of fresh evidence on appeal regarding the respondent’s life expectancy was properly rejected, both by reference to the settled principles governing admission of new evidence and the practice of requiring finality in litigation. The Tribunal’s assessment of general damages and other heads of damages was not shown to be excessive or erroneous, and the calculation of voluntary home care damages at gross rates was supported by authority.

Parties
Appellant: CSR Limited; Appellant: Midalco Pty Ltd; Respondent: Jan Bouwhuis
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 August 1991
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Dust Diseases, Mesothelioma, Admission of Fresh Evidence on Appeal, Adjournment, Life Expectancy Assessment, General Damages, Voluntary Home Care Damages, Use of Like Cases in Assessment, Finality of Judgments, Reconsideration by Dust Diseases Tribunal
Tort Law Personal Injury Law Damages Dust Diseases Mesothelioma Admission of Fresh Evidence on Appeal Adjournment Life Expectancy Assessment +5 more

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 14
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CSR Limited

Appellant

Midalco Pty Ltd

Appellant

Jan Bouwhuis

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether further medical evidence regarding life expectancy should be admitted on appeal
  2. 2 Whether the appeal should be adjourned to allow application to the Dust Diseases Tribunal to reconsider its judgment based on new evidence of the respondent’s condition
  3. 3 Whether assessment of general damages may consider awards in like cases

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the Court found that tender of fresh evidence on appeal regarding the respondent’s life expectancy was properly rejected, both by reference to the settled principles governing admission of new evidence and the practice of requiring finality in litigation. The Tribunal’s assessment of general damages and other heads of damages was not shown to be excessive or erroneous, and the calculation of voluntary home care damages at gross rates was supported by authority.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs