Nominal Defendant v Livaja [2011] NSWCA 121

Nominal Defendant v Livaja [2011] NSWCA 121

A judgment is not entered until formally recorded in the court’s computerized system, and a judge may correct an apparent calculation error before entry of judgment, especially if promptly raised. The trial judge in this case appropriately corrected an error in future economic loss calculation after it was immediately pointed out, and there was no sufficient basis to infer the correction was improperly influenced by knowledge of the offer of compromise. The assessment of damages, including earning capacity, was open on the evidence and not excessive.

Parties
Appellant: Nominal Defendant; Respondent: Slavko Livaja
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Appeal, Damages, Civil Procedure, Judgments and Orders, Future Economic Loss
Civil Law Appeal Damages Civil Procedure Judgments and Orders Future Economic Loss

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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nominal Defendant

Appellant

Slavko Livaja

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether judgment was entered and could be varied or set aside by the trial judge after oral pronouncement
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge's reconsideration of judgment was influenced by the knowledge of an offer of compromise
  3. 3 Whether the judgment included excessive damages not supported by evidence

Ratio Decidendi

A judgment is not entered until formally recorded in the court’s computerized system, and a judge may correct an apparent calculation error before entry of judgment, especially if promptly raised. The trial judge in this case appropriately corrected an error in future economic loss calculation after it was immediately pointed out, and there was no sufficient basis to infer the correction was improperly influenced by knowledge of the offer of compromise. The assessment of damages, including earning capacity, was open on the evidence and not excessive.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Dismiss the appeal.
  • Subject to variation, order that the appellant pay the respondent's costs in this Court.