White v Redding [2019] NSWCA 152
The primary judge's evaluative assessment that Ms Redding's non-economic loss was 55 per cent of the most extreme case was within a reasonable range given her severe and permanent injury, and his assessments of future economic loss and allowances for contact lenses were justified despite the absence of precise occupational earnings evidence, so no demonstrated error required appellate intervention.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 24 June 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed with costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['damages' 'non Economic Loss' 'future Economic Loss' 'negligence' 'appellate Review' 'statutory Interpretation']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the primary judge erred in assessing non-economic loss as 55 per cent of the most extreme case' 'Whether the primary judge erred in assessing future loss of earning capacity' 'Whether the allowance for contact lenses was appropriate']
Ratio Decidendi
The primary judge's evaluative assessment that Ms Redding's non-economic loss was 55 per cent of the most extreme case was within a reasonable range given her severe and permanent injury, and his assessments of future economic loss and allowances for contact lenses were justified despite the absence of precise occupational earnings evidence, so no demonstrated error required appellate intervention.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Orders
- ['Appeal dismissed.' "Appellant to pay respondent's costs."]
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment