Covington-Thomas v Cth of Australia [No 4] [2007] NSWSC 1401

Covington-Thomas v Cth of Australia [No 4] [2007] NSWSC 1401

The usual simple-interest averaging rule was to be applied because it was supported by binding decisions, had the virtues of simplicity and certainty, facilitated settlement, was routinely used in personal injury and Voyager litigation, and no cogent reason was shown for departing from it. The length of time and the...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Negligence Claim for Damages Arising From the Melbourne/voyager Collision / Judgment on Interest Following Earlier Judgment for the Plaintiff, With Damages Issues Reserved for Calculation
Outcome
Confirmation of order entitling the plaintiff to judgment.
Legal Topics
['interest on Damages' 'past Loss of Earning Capacity' 'past Loss of Superannuation/pension' 'method of Calculating Simple Interest' 'melbourne/voyager Collision']
['negligence' 'damages' 'civil Procedure'] ['interest on Damages' 'past Loss of Earning Capacity' 'past Loss of Superannuation/pension' 'method of Calculating Simple Interest' 'melbourne/voyager Collision']

Source-derived case record

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

Procedural Posture

Negligence Claim for Damages Arising From the Melbourne/voyager Collision / Judgment on Interest Following Earlier Judgment for the Plaintiff, With Damages Issues Reserved for Calculation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether interest on past loss of income and past loss of pension should be calculated by the usual broad averaging method or by a more precise actuarial calculation.' 'Whether the length of time over which interest was to be awarded and the size of the verdict justified departing from the usual rule.']

Ratio Decidendi

The usual simple-interest averaging rule was to be applied because it was supported by binding decisions, had the virtues of simplicity and certainty, facilitated settlement, was routinely used in personal injury and Voyager litigation, and no cogent reason was shown for departing from it. The length of time and the size of the award did not justify a lesser rate or a different calculation method.

Court Disposition

Confirmation of order entitling the plaintiff to judgment.

Orders

  • ['Interest is to be calculated using the method interest x amount x 1/2 period or 1/2 interest x amount x period for both past loss of income and past loss of pension.' 'The calculations should be made as at 18 October 2007.' 'The previously made order entitling the plaintiff to judgment is confirmed.']