Monahan v Bellevarde Constructions Pty Ltd & Ors (No 2) [2022] NSWDC 152

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Monahan v Bellevarde Constructions Pty Ltd & Ors (No 2) [2022] NSWDC 152 Hearing dates: 28 April 2022 Date of orders: 10 May 2022 Decision date: 10 May 2022 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Judge Levy SC Decision: See paragraph [16] for orders. Catchwords: VARIATION OF FINAL ORDERS – Notation of agreement on final orders noted Legislation Cited: Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 20.32 Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), s 34, s 35 Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1946 (NSW), s 5(2) Cases Cited: Monahan v Bellevarde Constructions Pty Ltd & Ors [2022] NSWDC 50 Category: Consequential orders Parties: Alan Monahan (Plaintiff) Bellevarde Constructions Pty Ltd (First defendant/second cross-claimant) L'Officina by Vincenzo Australia Pty Ltd (Second defendant/first cross-claimant) Allianz Australia Limited (Third defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr R Goodridge (Plaintiff) Mr B Hull (First defendant/second cross-claimant) Mr R Perla (Second and third defendants/first cross-claimant)

Solicitors: Firths (Plaintiff) Holman Webb (First defendant/Second cross-claimant) Moray & Agnew (Second and third defendants/first cross-claimant) File Number(s): 2020/119363 Publication restriction: None

Judgment

Post-judgment notices of motion 1. The principal judgment in these proceedings was delivered on 11 March 2022: Monahan v Bellevarde Constructions Pty Ltd & Ors [2022] NSWDC 50. These supplementary reasons, which assume familiarity with that decision, concern two post-judgment notices of motion respectively filed first, by the second and third defendants on 18 March 2022, and secondly, by the plaintiff on 23 March 2022. Those motions seek variations in the dispositive orders made at the time of judgment. The time interval between the filing and hearing of the notices of motion was due to the respective availabilities of counsel for the parties. 2. The effect of the amendments reflects first, the calculation of interest on the plaintiff's award of damages sought by the plaintiff for past economic loss, and secondly, the plaintiff's concession that, unfortunately for him, in this case he cannot recover damages in excess of the Court's jurisdictional limit of $750,000. This is because his case was brought under the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), ("CL Act") and the defendants filed defences objecting to extended or unlimited jurisdiction. The result would have been otherwise if his claim was assessed under the schemes for assessing damages for injuries sustained in a motor accident or employer's negligence, the irony here being that the plaintiff's injury was sustained whilst he was at work, but not due to employer negligence.