Redding v Lee; Evans v Muller [1983] HCA 16

High Court of Australia Gibbs C.J. Mason, Murphy, Wilson, Brennan, Deane and Dawson JJ. Redding v Lee; Evans v Muller [1983] HCA 16

ORDER Redding v. Lee. Appeal dismissed with costs. Evans v. Muller. Appeal allowed. Order that the order of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Queensland be varied by substituting the words and figures EIGHTY FOUR THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLARS for the words and figures NINETY ONE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS. Order that the appellant pay the respondent's costs of this appeal.

Cur. adv. vult.

The following written judgments were delivered:—

1983, May 19 Gibbs C.J.

These two appeals, which were heard in succession, raise for consideration the same question of principle, namely, whether the courts, in assessing the damages payable for personal injuries which have caused the plaintiff to suffer a loss of earning capacity, should take into account benefits which the plaintiff has received under the Social Security Act 1947 Cth, as amended, but which he would not have received had it not been for his injuries.

In the first matter, Redding v. Lee, the question arose on a case stated for the opinion of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia. It was stated in the case that the plaintiff claimed damages for negligence causing him bodily injury, that one element in the assessment of the plaintiff's damages was a claim for loss of wages and that the plaintiff had, before the trial, been in receipt of an invalid pension. It appears to have been admitted, although it was not expressly stated in the case, that the incapacity which gave rise to the entitlement to the pension resulted from the injury caused by the negligence. The Full Court was asked the following question: "Should the payments of invalid pension above referred to be deducted from the plaintiff's loss of wages arising out of the accident?" The Court answered that question, no [1] .