Werner v Krahe [2002] NSWCA 168

Werner v Krahe [2002] NSWCA 168

The damages awarded must reflect only the loss and disabilities attributable to the injuries suffered in the motor accident, not the unrelated onset of multiple sclerosis. The trial judge’s methodology for most heads of damage was justified except that the allowance for future gratuitous care was excessive and economic loss underestimated; accordingly, those heads were adjusted and judgment for damages substituted accordingly.

Parties
Appellant: Ivan Werner; Respondent: Leanne Maree Krahe
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 June 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal and Cross Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Appeal From District Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; cross-appeal allowed in part; judgment below set aside; substituted judgment for respondent in the sum of $441,000.00; costs awarded to respondent.
Legal Topics
Damages Assessment, Motor Vehicle Accident, Concurrent Causes of Disability, Griffiths V Kerkemeyer Claims
Tort Law Personal Injury Damages Assessment Motor Vehicle Accident Concurrent Causes of Disability Griffiths V Kerkemeyer Claims

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ivan Werner

Appellant

Leanne Maree Krahe

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal and Cross Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Appeal From District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate assessment of damages where plaintiff's injuries are compounded by subsequent unrelated condition (multiple sclerosis)
  2. 2 Correct quantification of damages for non-economic loss, past and future economic loss, and costs for gratuitous services pursuant to Griffiths v Kerkemeyer

Ratio Decidendi

The damages awarded must reflect only the loss and disabilities attributable to the injuries suffered in the motor accident, not the unrelated onset of multiple sclerosis. The trial judge’s methodology for most heads of damage was justified except that the allowance for future gratuitous care was excessive and economic loss underestimated; accordingly, those heads were adjusted and judgment for damages substituted accordingly.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; cross-appeal allowed in part; judgment below set aside; substituted judgment for respondent in the sum of $441,000.00; costs awarded to respondent.

Orders

  • The appeal be allowed in part.
  • The cross-appeal be allowed in part.