Woolworths Ltd v Mohamad [2008] NSWCA 336

Woolworths Ltd v Mohamad [2008] NSWCA 336

The primary judge's assessments of past and future economic loss disclosed no error because the findings about the respondent's incapacity, limited residual earning capacity, unsuccessful attempts to obtain work, and inability to obtain a security licence were open on the evidence. The $25,000 award for future medical expenses exceeded what the accepted evidence could justify and was reduced to $18,000. Interest of $10,372 on past economic loss should have been awarded, but the superannuation claim was too vague and uncertain to disturb the primary judge's refusal of that head of loss.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 December 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal and Cross Appeal in Personal Injury Damages Proceedings / Court of Appeal From District Court Judgment of Judge Garling Dated 27 November 2007
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; cross-appeal allowed in part; District Court judgment set aside and substituted with judgment for the respondent in the sum of $336,268 dating from 27 November 2007.
Legal Topics
['past Economic Loss' 'future Economic Loss' 'future Medical Expenses' 'interest on Past Economic Loss' 'superannuation Benefits' 'residual Earning Capacity']
['torts' 'personal Injury' 'damages'] ['past Economic Loss' 'future Economic Loss' 'future Medical Expenses' 'interest on Past Economic Loss' 'superannuation Benefits' 'residual Earning Capacity']

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

Procedural Posture

Appeal and Cross Appeal in Personal Injury Damages Proceedings / Court of Appeal From District Court Judgment of Judge Garling Dated 27 November 2007

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the primary judge erred in assessing past economic loss for the period before and after the respondent's pain management course." 'Whether the primary judge erred in assessing future economic loss at $300 net per week to age 65 less vicissitudes.' 'Whether the award of $25,000 for future medical expenses was supported by the evidence.' 'Whether interest should have been awarded on past economic loss.' 'Whether damages should have been awarded for loss of past and future superannuation benefits.']

Ratio Decidendi

The primary judge's assessments of past and future economic loss disclosed no error because the findings about the respondent's incapacity, limited residual earning capacity, unsuccessful attempts to obtain work, and inability to obtain a security licence were open on the evidence. The $25,000 award for future medical expenses exceeded what the accepted evidence could justify and was reduced to $18,000. Interest of $10,372 on past economic loss should have been awarded, but the superannuation claim was too vague and uncertain to disturb the primary judge's refusal of that head of loss.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; cross-appeal allowed in part; District Court judgment set aside and substituted with judgment for the respondent in the sum of $336,268 dating from 27 November 2007.

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed in part.' 'Cross-appeal allowed in part.' 'Set aside the judgment of Judge Garling in the sum of $332,896 made on 27 November 2007 and substitute therefor judgment for the respondent in the sum of $336,268, such judgment to date from 27 November 2007.' "The appellant to pay 80% of the respondent's...