REECE v REECE [1994] NSWCA 259

REECE v REECE [1994] NSWCA 259

The trial judge's assessment of 33 1/3% of a most extreme case was wholly erroneous when compared to the position of a much younger woman with similar injuries; an appropriate proportion is 22.5% of the maximum amount.

Parties
Appellant: Reece; Respondent: Reece
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 February 1994
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Damages Assessment, Non Economic Loss, Motor Vehicle Accident
Personal Injury Damages Assessment Non Economic Loss Motor Vehicle Accident

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Reece

Appellant

Reece

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge's assessment of non-economic loss as 33 1/3% of a most extreme case was erroneous

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's assessment of 33 1/3% of a most extreme case was wholly erroneous when compared to the position of a much younger woman with similar injuries; an appropriate proportion is 22.5% of the maximum amount.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • His Honour's judgment set aside; judgment substituted for the appropriate amount based on 22.5% of the maximum.
  • Parties to bring in short minutes of order; argument on the indexed amount adjourned.