Nicholas by her Tutor Jones v Jimenez [2020] NSWDC 71

Nicholas by her Tutor Jones v Jimenez [2020] NSWDC 71

The plaintiff's evidence was rejected in its entirety. The Court found that she lied on affirmation, feigned her injuries from the outset, misled treating practitioners and medico-legal experts, and pursued the proceedings to obtain money to which she was not entitled. Because the plaintiff failed to prove any compensable injury or disability supporting past care or out-of-pocket expenses, judgment and verdict were proposed for the defendant. The Court also considered that removal of the tutor and indemnity costs were appropriate in light of the findings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Negligence Motor Vehicle Accident Personal Injury Claim / Principal Judgment After Hearing; Proposed Orders
Outcome
Proposed judgment and verdict for the defendant, with proposed removal of the tutor and indemnity costs against the plaintiff.
Legal Topics
['motor Vehicle Accident' 'personal Injury' 'compensable Injury' 'conversion Disorder' 'malingering' 'credit Findings' 'past Care' 'out of Pocket Expenses' 'removal of Tutor' 'indemnity Costs']
['torts' 'damages' 'civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['motor Vehicle Accident' 'personal Injury' 'compensable Injury' 'conversion Disorder' 'malingering' 'credit Findings' 'past Care' 'out of Pocket Expenses' 'removal of Tutor' 'indemnity 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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil Negligence Motor Vehicle Accident Personal Injury Claim / Principal Judgment After Hearing; Proposed Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff suffered any compensable injury as a result of the motor vehicle accident.' "Whether the plaintiff's asserted disabilities were caused by conversion disorder or were feigned or malingering." "Whether the plaintiff's credit supported claims for past care and past out-of-pocket expenses." 'Whether the tutor should be removed.' 'Whether the defendant should receive indemnity costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's evidence was rejected in its entirety. The Court found that she lied on affirmation, feigned her injuries from the outset, misled treating practitioners and medico-legal experts, and pursued the proceedings to obtain money to which she was not entitled. Because the plaintiff failed to prove any compensable injury or disability supporting past care or out-of-pocket expenses, judgment and verdict were proposed for the defendant. The Court also considered that removal of the tutor and indemnity costs were appropriate in light of the findings.

Court Disposition

Proposed judgment and verdict for the defendant, with proposed removal of the tutor and indemnity costs against the plaintiff.

Orders

  • ['Order that the tutor, Taleigha Jones, be removed as a tutor in these proceedings.' 'Order that there be judgment and verdict for the defendant.' "Order that the plaintiff pay the defendant's costs on a full indemnity basis."]