Lee v Strelnicks [2019] NSWSC 526
The Assessor was not in error by requiring the plaintiff to prove her need for a replacement vehicle before awarding damages at the market rate. The plaintiff failed to provide sufficiently detailed evidence to discharge the burden, and the assessment of damages based on capital interest was a factual conclusion open to the Assessor and not subject to review under s 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW).
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 10 May 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Amended Summons dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['judicial Review of Local Court Decision' 'quantum of Damages' 'proof of Quantum' 'motor Vehicle Accident' 'compensatory Damages']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the Local Court Assessor erred in law by requiring strict proof of need for a replacement vehicle in assessing damages' 'Whether the assessment of damages for temporary loss of use of a motor vehicle was contrary to established legal principles']
Ratio Decidendi
The Assessor was not in error by requiring the plaintiff to prove her need for a replacement vehicle before awarding damages at the market rate. The plaintiff failed to provide sufficiently detailed evidence to discharge the burden, and the assessment of damages based on capital interest was a factual conclusion open to the Assessor and not subject to review under s 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW).
Court Disposition
Amended Summons dismissed
Orders
- ['The Amended Summons filed on 22 March 2019 is dismissed.' "The plaintiff is to pay the first defendant'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