GILLIES v NANCARROW AND ANOR [1998] NSWCA 92

GILLIES v NANCARROW AND ANOR [1998] NSWCA 92

The trial judge erred by adopting a five-year average in calculating lost earnings when three of those years were affected by abnormal circumstances not likely to recur. The proper figure for probable pre-injury earnings was $1,313 per week rather than $1,010. The judge's finding as to residual earning capacity at $725 per week, including bookkeeping work for her husband's business, was within the permissible range based on the evidence. The appeal was allowed in part, and damages were reassessed accordingly.

Parties
Appellant: GILLIES; Respondent: NANNARROW
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 February 1998
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Assessment of Damages
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Assessment of Damages, Personal Injury, Economic Loss, Motor Vehicle Accident
Damages Tort Law Assessment of Damages Personal Injury Economic Loss Motor Vehicle Accident

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GILLIES

Appellant

NANNARROW

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Assessment of Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate calculation of appellant's probable earnings from pharmacy if uninjured
  2. 2 Assessment of appellant's residual earning capacity after injury for the purpose of economic loss damages
  3. 3 Approach to accounting for abnormal years in calculation of past and future economic loss

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred by adopting a five-year average in calculating lost earnings when three of those years were affected by abnormal circumstances not likely to recur. The proper figure for probable pre-injury earnings was $1,313 per week rather than $1,010. The judge's finding as to residual earning capacity at $725 per week, including bookkeeping work for her husband's business, was within the permissible range based on the evidence. The appeal was allowed in part, and damages were reassessed accordingly.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Judgment of the Common Law Division set aside except as to costs.
  • Substitute judgment for the plaintiff for $968,044.15 with effect from 13 December 1996.