NYMAN v VALMAS [1997] NSWCA 235

NYMAN v VALMAS [1997] NSWCA 235

Damages for stress and anxiety were set aside because there was no evidence supporting such an award; interest should be assessed on the award only after deduction of the costs of the notional trial.

Parties
Appellant: Nyman; Respondent: Valmas
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 June 1997
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Judgment for the sum of $251,333 set aside; judgment for the respondent in the sum of $227,173 entered. Respondent to pay appellant’s costs of appeal and to have certificate under the Suitor's Fund Act if so qualified.
Legal Topics
Solicitor Negligence, Damages Assessment, Limitation Period, Stress and Anxiety Damages, Interest Calculation, Submitting Appearance
Professional Negligence Personal Injury Solicitor Negligence Damages Assessment Limitation Period Stress and Anxiety Damages Interest Calculation Submitting Appearance

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nyman

Appellant

Valmas

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the award of damages for stress and anxiety suffered as a result of appellant's negligence was supported by evidence
  2. 2 Whether the damages awarded for stress and anxiety were excessive
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge erred in calculation of interest

Ratio Decidendi

Damages for stress and anxiety were set aside because there was no evidence supporting such an award; interest should be assessed on the award only after deduction of the costs of the notional trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Judgment for the sum of $251,333 set aside; judgment for the respondent in the sum of $227,173 entered. Respondent to pay appellant’s costs of appeal and to have certificate under the Suitor's Fund Act if so qualified.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Judgment for sum of $251,333 set aside