PADOVAN v RATKOVIC [1995] NSWCA 348

PADOVAN v RATKOVIC [1995] NSWCA 348

The trial judge failed to apply the procedure required by s79 of the Motor Traffic Act by not properly determining if the plaintiff had a significant impairment and the proportion of that impairment to the most extreme case. As a result, the assessment of damages was defective and the judgment must be set aside with a new trial ordered on the question of damages.

Parties
Appellant: Padovan; Respondent: Ratkovic
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 March 1995
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment below set aside; new trial ordered on damages; respondent to pay appellant’s costs with potential certificate under the Suitors Fund Act.
Legal Topics
Quantum of Damages, Non Economic Loss, Assessment Under S79 Motor Traffic Act
Tort Motor Vehicle Law Quantum of Damages Non Economic Loss Assessment Under S79 Motor Traffic Act

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Padovan

Appellant

Ratkovic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge correctly applied s79 of the Motor Traffic Act in assessing damages for non-economic loss
  2. 2 Whether the award of damages was insufficient

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge failed to apply the procedure required by s79 of the Motor Traffic Act by not properly determining if the plaintiff had a significant impairment and the proportion of that impairment to the most extreme case. As a result, the assessment of damages was defective and the judgment must be set aside with a new trial ordered on the question of damages.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment below set aside; new trial ordered on damages; respondent to pay appellant’s costs with potential certificate under the Suitors Fund Act.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs.
  • Judgment below set aside.