HILL V. FERGUSON AND OTHERS 3/1953

HILL V. FERGUSON AND OTHERS 3/1953

Given the nature of the injury, the loss of sight in one eye, the plaintiff's suffering, and the impact on her life, the original award of damages was inadequate, and should be increased to £1,700.

Parties
Plaintiff: Hill; Defendant: Ferguson & Others
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 June 1953
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Assessment of Damages
Tort Negligence Assessment of 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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hill

Plaintiff

Ferguson & Others

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the quantum of damages assessed by the trial judge for the plaintiff's injury adequate?
  2. 2 What compensation should be awarded for loss of sight in one eye and associated suffering?

Ratio Decidendi

Given the nature of the injury, the loss of sight in one eye, the plaintiff's suffering, and the impact on her life, the original award of damages was inadequate, and should be increased to £1,700.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs.

Orders

  • Judgment below set aside.
  • Judgment for plaintiff for £1,700 in lieu of previous award.