McKENZIE v CHADWICK INDUSTRIES PTY LTD [1992] NSWCA 149

McKENZIE v CHADWICK INDUSTRIES PTY LTD [1992] NSWCA 149

Trial judge's assessment of economic loss and general damages was inadequate and involved errors regarding double deductions, vicissitudes and future capacity. Court of Appeal substituted increased awards for past economic loss, future economic loss and general damages, applied correct deduction for workers compensation and recalculated interest according to the proper legal principles.

Parties
Plaintiff: McKenzie; Defendant: Chadwick Industries Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 August 1992
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment for the plaintiff for $326,076 and costs; respondent to have certificate under the Suitors Fund Act if qualified.
Legal Topics
Quantum of Damages, Assessment of Damages, Workers Compensation Credit, Interest Calculation
Damages Personal Injury Quantum of Damages Assessment of Damages Workers Compensation Credit Interest Calculation

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

McKenzie

Plaintiff

Chadwick Industries Pty Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Assessment of quantum of damages for severe burn injuries
  2. 2 Appropriate deductions for workers compensation
  3. 3 Calculation of past and future economic loss

Ratio Decidendi

Trial judge's assessment of economic loss and general damages was inadequate and involved errors regarding double deductions, vicissitudes and future capacity. Court of Appeal substituted increased awards for past economic loss, future economic loss and general damages, applied correct deduction for workers compensation and recalculated interest according to the proper legal principles.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment for the plaintiff for $326,076 and costs; respondent to have certificate under the Suitors Fund Act if qualified.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs.
  • Judgment of Sully J dated 10 April 1990 set aside.