Carvajal v Lamba [2019] NSWDC 284

Procedural Posture

Civil Motor Vehicle Accident Negligence Claim / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff's or the defendant's version of the motor vehicle accident should be accepted." 'Whether the defendant breached a duty of care owed to the plaintiff.' 'Whether there was contributory negligence by the plaintiff.' 'Whether the plaintiff was entitled to damages for non-economic loss, gratuitous attendant care services, out-of-pocket expenses, past economic loss and future loss of earning capacity.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's evidence was accepted as careful and credible, while the defendant was found not to be reliable. The objective vehicle damage was consistent with the plaintiff's version and inconsistent with a hard rear-end collision. The defendant breached her duty of care by veering from the kerbside lane into the plaintiff's lane and striking the plaintiff's vehicle. Because the plaintiff's version was accepted and she lost control after being knocked off course, there was no contributory negligence. Damages were limited to past and future out-of-pocket expenses because the statutory thresholds and evidentiary requirements for the other claimed heads of damage were not met.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant for $7,013.36, with costs payable by the defendant.

Orders

• ['Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant for $7,013.36.' "Order the defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs." 'Grant leave to the parties to approach my Associate within 7 days if either party seeks a different costs order.']