Hage-Fairbrother v West [2016] NSWDC 334

Hage-Fairbrother v West [2016] NSWDC 334

The plaintiff proved compensable injuries from the dog attack, including healed physical injuries with residual left little finger impairment and mild post-traumatic stress disorder, but did not prove the claimed future psychiatric treatment, significant future earning capacity loss, or lost overtime. The Court preferred the defendants' psychiatric evidence on future treatment, found only limited past wage and leave loss proved, assessed non-economic loss at no more than 20% of a most extreme case, and awarded a modest buffer for possible future counselling and related lost earnings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Damages Claim Arising From Dog Attack / Assessment of Damages After Defendants Admitted Breach of Duty
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $33,604.04; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['dog Attack' 'physical Injuries' 'psychological Injuries' 'non Economic Loss' 'past Economic Loss' 'future Economic Loss' 'medical Expenses' 'loss of Overtime']
['torts' 'damages' 'personal Injury'] ['dog Attack' 'physical Injuries' 'psychological Injuries' 'non Economic Loss' 'past Economic Loss' 'future Economic Loss' 'medical Expenses' 'loss of Overtime']

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

Civil Damages Claim Arising From Dog Attack / Assessment of Damages After Defendants Admitted Breach of Duty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["What damages should be awarded for the plaintiff's physical and psychological injuries from the dog attack." 'Whether future medical expenses for psychiatric treatment, psychological counselling and antidepressants should be awarded.' 'Whether past economic loss, including lost wages, holiday pay, sick pay and overtime, was proved.' "Whether future economic loss was proved by the plaintiff's residual physical injury or post-traumatic stress disorder." 'What percentage of a most extreme case should be assessed for non-economic loss.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff proved compensable injuries from the dog attack, including healed physical injuries with residual left little finger impairment and mild post-traumatic stress disorder, but did not prove the claimed future psychiatric treatment, significant future earning capacity loss, or lost overtime. The Court preferred the defendants' psychiatric evidence on future treatment, found only limited past wage and leave loss proved, assessed non-economic loss at no more than 20% of a most extreme case, and awarded a modest buffer for possible future counselling and related lost earnings.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $33,604.04; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['Judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $33,604.04.' 'Reserve the question of costs for further hearing on Wednesday, 7 December 2016 at 10am before P Taylor SC DCJ (estimate of one hour).']