iy [(v 14 val ive) nk to 2.25(1j) - Whether ince ~ Comparison with cvomon low AGt ead vy Jennit No. VG €0 of 1978. Sydy IN THE FEDERAL COURT GF AUSTRALIA ) ) VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY ) ) } ENERA&AL DIVISION SUPREME Co AND 3 Coram : Brennan, Deane and Fisher Jd. JUDGES MAKING be =~ Ci] s =) ry mS v7] be a ATE OF ORD IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) ) VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY ) VG No.60 of 19 ) ) GENERAL DIVISION i THE SUPREME COURT AND : Respondent Coram : Brennan, Deane and Fisher JJ. BRENN Miss Tinkler, the appellant, suffered personal injury in a motor car accident on 10 May 1974. She was a resident of Victoria and was a person in relation to whom Part TII of the Motor applied (s.13). Her injuries preve a clerk. Accordingly, she .for a time in her employ co employe suffered "a loss of income in the ¢ £ the injury" as referred to in s.25(1) of the Act reason © ion, She was that sub-sectlon. o a ct a - _ rh as a.result o cone by re re) m on Act. vments under of the loss of that i ect to this Act, pay ated in accordan A is the amount of of that accor and Wois the number incapacit During June 1975, the Moter Accidents Board (the Board erred to in s.25(1)) paid the anppeliant $2,371.2 , in 22 payments which MA for the most part, at fo: hily intervals. Each paymen was made in respect of a certain number of working days, rate of $9.12 per working day. and was calculated at ti Five working days were taken to be a working week, so that $45.60 was, in the appellant's case, that amount of salary or i 3. sey pay Commi that Court of It iS submitted that the payments were not income, and that the subvention for compensation for the earning capacity which is said: to be @ capital In §$.25(2)} of the 163] SS is cr under tha' up his income in exchange for cnaracter of the 6 compensation for an asset acquired by the State or sterilized in the hands of se their character from the character, in the sioners (1927) 43 TLR 476; Wade (1951) 84 C.L.R.1G5 at p.114 } are not made in exchange under i. 4) ua t t re 2R.57 L un @ e vO emplo accider an in wit co as than waite o s stabutrozry formula for its quantification provide the clearest purcesca or a of the amount to} fu an S te Q cr kr Oo re] pre-accident week! ax (s,20). These statut Liv recoupin From the tayrpayer's viewpou: not earning income, conseyuent upon her payment of benefit under s.25{1). The purposa of the payments and the circumstances of their receipt combine to che income character of the amounts paid. o 10) + % is bo br ra a + co cr c a N ui on BR ~~ i] bas ph ae ro} re) couped pursu avard of common law compon Law only one (1962) the affection of earning capacity over the entire cr accident pericd. Secticn 25(1), on the other hand, does no mt or impairment o y for a partial period of 104 went under s.Z5(1) not is the subiect idering t natura e beacause 'ed. I would not wish, however, to Of Necessa TO €axyn bayvots caZacilem ; al Q oO we) i tc lon ret qQ Ned vo Reg O rn . a c ~ a 4 ie] ia "mT 2 ot a a pas opel ~ 5 fa fs = = 4 uw ao) fe > ! C c Fast " Pn . ! ra) ww ct a @ om ees fea) Pos . ~ i cam io a co G rt or = Pa = cal = a . i i . 4 ot Z an 2A & ° ss rH . Ou = a . Ui Pa ¥ Ea So 2 a . G r ay wy st nat ~ oy aoa as * a o toe they ant nea a 1D) © one ine yyyte SF" « fo ~~ uy i] sme a AS w mn fal wa bn ° Ww ag (a) se) Oy wu Ou a u} i) wy Cc gnifican i s tt} are) or c 3) a S x alo é [3 it now bre a 1] 1) Os sed u (> By) a WOE ca sa in 0?) a im o " wo me i] ca ke a e 19) Q ae) me on mp co ore ea oo é a eo wet a ny pon ics] a) G a we) a ree) w ce) ig (0) ny te vL Fa) kj he ece r re OES Vib rererrec Qh =.) @ SPOR mt eet oes LO w be GS o re pd ort w rn bu OM salen te: - c rn fones rani? <b Saas isd a c uo se Co ot a oS ro 3) uy