Rowe v Edwards [1934] HCA 32

51 C.L.R.] OF AUSTRALIA. 351

[HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.]

ROWE . a . f = ' 4 4 . APPELLANT ; PLaINtTIFF, AND EDWARDS . : x zs é, : e . ResponpEnt. DEFENDANT,

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES.

Damages — Pecuniary loss from personal injuy— Damages awarded by jury—| 1,0, or A. Inadequate—Unreasonable—New trial, generally or limited to question of damages. 1 934,

Jn an action to recover damages for injuries caused by the defendant's © "7 negligence it was shown that the injuries were very serious and were permanent 5¥PNEY, in character; that they had inflicted much pain and involved deprivation of 4% 23+ earning capacity. The jury assessed the special damages correctly, but jis, Starke, awarded the sum of £50 only for general damages including loss of earnings, Dixon, Evatt

ip je id MeTi¢ n actual and prospective, and pain and suffering. ya. a

Held, by the whole Court, that the sum awarded as general damages was, in the circumstances, so inadequate as to entitle the appellant to a new trial; but, by Rich, Hvatt and McTiernan JJ. (Starke and Dixon JJ. dissenting), that the new trial should be limited to the question of damages.

Decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Full Court) reversed.

Appeal from the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

An action was brought in the Supreme Court of New South Wales by Reginald Lloyd Rowe, an infant, by his next friend, against Leslie Malcolm Edwards for damages caused to the plaintiff by a motor vehicle colliding with the motor cycle, and side-car attach- ment, which he was riding. The collision occurred whilst the motor

H.C. o A. 1934.

Rowe

Epwarps,

'

HIGH COURT [1934

vehicle was entering or was about to enter the goods dock of a warehouse fronting the thoroughfare along which the plaintiff was passing. The plaintiff was employed to deliver packages and parcels in the various suburbs of Sydney, and, at the time of the accident, was returning to his place of employment. There was some conflict of evidence as to the respective rates of speed at which the motor vehicle and the motor cycle were moving ; as to whether the driver of the motor vehicle gave any warning of hisintention to turn and cross the road ; and as to whether the plaintiff was on his correct side of the road. As the result of the accident the plaintiff's leg was broken. The break, which was a serious one, caused the plaintiff to be an inmate of a hospital for nearly three months. At the end of that period he was discharged as an in-patient, wearing walking calipers on the injured leg, which, according to the medical evidence, it would be necessary for him to wear for some time to come. The medical evidence was that there was a likelihood of permanent disability which might be serious. At the hearing it was stated that at that date the plaintifi's leg exhibited no range of movement, although some improvement was bound to take place in the future. The plaintiff's suffering was shown to be great and extended over a long period. The evidence showed that the plaintiff had incurred hospital, medical and sundry expenses to the extent of £62 4s., and that, at the date of the hearing, he had lost the sum of £47 in the form of wages which, if he had not been injured, he would have received for his work. During the course of the hearing a witness was asked whether he realized that if the plaintiff was not successful in the action he would be entitled to compensation under the Workers' Compensation Act 1926-1929 (N.S.W.). The question was objected to and disallowed.