DOWNIE V. STONHAM

DOWNIE V. STONHAM

The sum awarded by the trial judge did not fully take into account the seriousness of the appellant’s disability and its likely long-term consequences, and was therefore unreasonably low; the award was increased to £1,500 to better reflect the injury and its impact.

Parties
Appellant: Downie; Respondent: Stonham
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 May 1960
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment After Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Assessment of Damages, Personal Injury Damages
Torts Personal Injury Negligence Assessment of Damages Personal Injury Damages

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 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Downie

Appellant

Stonham

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment After Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the amount of damages awarded to the appellant by the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory was inadequate for injuries suffered due to the respondent's negligence

Ratio Decidendi

The sum awarded by the trial judge did not fully take into account the seriousness of the appellant’s disability and its likely long-term consequences, and was therefore unreasonably low; the award was increased to £1,500 to better reflect the injury and its impact.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory varied by deleting the sum of £850 and substituting the sum of £1,500.
  • Appellant awarded costs.