Kendirjian v Ayoub [2008] NSWCA 194

Kendirjian v Ayoub [2008] NSWCA 194

The primary judge was entitled to find the appellant lacked credibility regarding the extent of his disability, based on considerable video evidence that contradicted his testimony and presentation to medical professionals. The damages assessment was therefore not inadequate, reasons provided were sufficient, and findings in relation to claims for attendant care and economic loss were open to the trial judge. The failings of the appellant's counsel in the appeal warranted orders for them to bear wasted costs.

Parties
Appellant: David Anthony Kendirjian; Respondent: Cheree Elizabeth Ayoub
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 August 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Motor Vehicle Accident, Damages Assessment, Credibility of Plaintiff, Adequacy of Reasons, Legal Practitioners—wasted Costs
Damages Personal Injury Motor Vehicle Accident Damages Assessment Credibility of Plaintiff Adequacy of Reasons Legal Practitioners—wasted Costs

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 32 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Anthony Kendirjian

Appellant

Cheree Elizabeth Ayoub

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether damages awarded by the primary judge were inadequate for personal injuries in a motor vehicle accident
  2. 2 Whether the primary judge failed to provide adequate reasons for the award
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's evidence on disability was credible

Ratio Decidendi

The primary judge was entitled to find the appellant lacked credibility regarding the extent of his disability, based on considerable video evidence that contradicted his testimony and presentation to medical professionals. The damages assessment was therefore not inadequate, reasons provided were sufficient, and findings in relation to claims for attendant care and economic loss were open to the trial judge. The failings of the appellant's counsel in the appeal warranted orders for them to bear wasted costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Respondent to file and serve within seven days written submissions as to whether any, and if so which, of the costs of the appeal should be ordered to be paid on an indemnity basis.