El Tarraf v Linknarf Limited [2004] NSWSC 244

El Tarraf v Linknarf Limited [2004] NSWSC 244

The proper approach, consistent with Court of Appeal authority, is to deduct workers' compensation payments from the assessed damages to arrive at the sum for which judgment is to be entered under s 151B(1)(b) Workers' Compensation Act 1987. For costs, sufficient reason existed for the plaintiff to commence and continue proceedings in the Supreme Court, but given the award's amount and history, only half costs should be allowed. The plaintiff must also pay defendant's costs thrown away by certain disruptions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury (common Law) Claim by Employee Against Employer / Judgment After Trial on Assessment of Damages, Judgment and Costs
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff for $122,680.65; respective orders for costs detailed below.
Legal Topics
["workers' Compensation Payments Deduction From Common Law Damages" 'costs in Supreme Court Under Threshold' "interpretation of S 151 B and S 151 Z Workers' Compensation Act 1987" 'jurisdictional Thresholds for Claims']
['tort Law' 'employment Law' "workers' Compensation"] ["workers' Compensation Payments Deduction From Common Law Damages" 'costs in Supreme Court Under Threshold' "interpretation of S 151 B and S 151 Z Workers' Compensation Act 1987" 'jurisdictional Thresholds for 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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury (common Law) Claim by Employee Against Employer / Judgment After Trial on Assessment of Damages, Judgment and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether workers' compensation payments are to be deducted from damages assessment before entering judgment under s 151B Workers' Compensation Act 1987 (NSW)" 'Whether the amount recovered for costs purposes is the gross or net assessment of damages under Supreme Court Rules Pt 52A r 33' 'Appropriate orders for costs where gross damages do not exceed jurisdictional threshold']

Ratio Decidendi

The proper approach, consistent with Court of Appeal authority, is to deduct workers' compensation payments from the assessed damages to arrive at the sum for which judgment is to be entered under s 151B(1)(b) Workers' Compensation Act 1987. For costs, sufficient reason existed for the plaintiff to commence and continue proceedings in the Supreme Court, but given the award's amount and history, only half costs should be allowed. The plaintiff must also pay defendant's costs thrown away by certain disruptions.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff for $122,680.65; respective orders for costs detailed below.

Orders

  • ['Judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $122,680.65.' "The defendant to pay fifty percent of the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings before this Court, excluding the plaintiff's costs for the time lost on 10, 12, 13 and 14 February 2003, and to pay fifty percent of the plaintiff's costs of the hearing before...