23 Jul 2014
Exemplary damages require intention or subjective recklessness; the High Court held the judge properly inferred that an experienced solicitor who destroyed a prior will without inquiry, contrary to firm practice and appreciating the potential prejudice, had the requisite conscious appreciation such that exemplary damages were available, but reduced the quantum from $30,000 to $23,000.
5 Sept 2012
The pleading was generally adequate under the applicable principles and did not have to set out the evidence by which allegations would be proved, but an allegation that senior management deliberately concealed supervisory failures and knowingly put RSA employees at risk must identify the individual managers targeted or be pared back to a claim of gross negligence/objective recklessness; otherwise the defendant cannot fairly prepare a defence.
24 Mar 2010
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal: (1) s 317 of the Accident Compensation Act 2001 does not bar standalone claims for exemplary damages; (2) s 86 of the State Sector Act 1988 does not deprive the Crown of tortious liability under s 6(1) of the Crown Proceedings Act; and (3) exemplary damages for negligent infliction of personal injury are available only where the defendant acted intentionally or with subjective recklessness (a conscious appreciation of the risk and deliberate running of that risk). The matter is remitted to the High Court for trial.