Stevanovic v Stjelja & Ors [1999] NSWSC 29

Stevanovic v Stjelja & Ors [1999] NSWSC 29

The plaintiff's back condition was referable entirely to the first accident, which made the first defendants solely responsible for that condition and for his loss of earning capacity. The second accident caused a serious neck condition which would have taken some years to resolve, and the third accident rendered the neck condition permanent and satisfied the statutory threshold for non-economic loss under s79 of the Motor Accidents Act. Damages were therefore assessed separately against each defendant according to their responsibility for the plaintiff's injuries and losses.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 February 1999
Procedural Posture
Damages Proceedings for Personal Injuries From Three Accidents Heard Together / Reasons for Judgment After Hearing; Liability Admitted and Damages to Be Assessed
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiff in each case.
Legal Topics
['non Economic Loss' 'loss of Earnings' 'gratuitous Services' 'out of Pocket Expenses' 'apportionment of Responsibility Between Defendants' 'interest on Damages']
['personal Injury' 'damages' 'motor Accidents'] ['non Economic Loss' 'loss of Earnings' 'gratuitous Services' 'out of Pocket Expenses' 'apportionment of Responsibility Between Defendants' 'interest on Damages']

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

Damages Proceedings for Personal Injuries From Three Accidents Heard Together / Reasons for Judgment After Hearing; Liability Admitted and Damages to Be Assessed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What measure of damages should be awarded to the plaintiff for injuries arising from the three accidents.' "What extent of responsibility each defendant bore for the plaintiff's condition and losses." "Whether the second and third accidents aggravated the plaintiff's back condition." "Whether the third accident significantly impaired the plaintiff's ability to lead a normal life for the purposes of s79 of the Motor Accidents Act." "Which defendant or defendants were responsible for the plaintiff's past and future inability to work." 'What allowance should be made for gratuitous services and out-of-pocket expenses.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's back condition was referable entirely to the first accident, which made the first defendants solely responsible for that condition and for his loss of earning capacity. The second accident caused a serious neck condition which would have taken some years to resolve, and the third accident rendered the neck condition permanent and satisfied the statutory threshold for non-economic loss under s79 of the Motor Accidents Act. Damages were therefore assessed separately against each defendant according to their responsibility for the plaintiff's injuries and losses.

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiff in each case.

Orders

  • ['Judgment for plaintiff in each case.' 'The parties were requested to bring in short minutes to give effect to the reasons, with argument on costs if necessary.']