PROPRIETORS OF STRATA PLAN NO 121 v PUFLETT [1989] NSWCA 169

PROPRIETORS OF STRATA PLAN NO 121 v PUFLETT

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL

SAMUELS, MEAGHER and Hope JJA 29 August 1989, 17 October 1989

[1989] NSWCA 169

COMMON LAW — PERSONAL INJURY — CALCULATION OF DAMAGES — NO QUESTION OF PRINCIPLE

Samuels JA I agree with Meagher JA.

Meagher JA This is an appeal by the defendant in an action of negligence brought by the plaintiff, the present respondent, which was heard by Lee J sitting without a jury. His Honour on 12 February 1987 gave the respondent judgment in the sum of $179,177.00 against the appellant.

The judgment related to injuries which the respondent (who is a gynaecologist and obstetrician) suffered on 30 May 1982 when alighting from a lift in premises of which the appellant is her body corporate.

His Honour, as I have said, found the appellant negligent; and there is no appeal on the question of its liability. The present appeal relates solely to the quantum of damages awarded by his Honour.

His Honour's award of damages comprised the following factors:

(i) general damages: $37,500.00 (ii) interest on general damages: 6,650.00 (iii) loss of earnings to date of hearing: 67,000.00

(iv) interest on item (iii): 22,027.00 (v) future economic loss: 46,000.00

(vi) out-of-pockets: 4,163.05

As can be seen, the award of $179,177.00 contains a mathematical mistake. It should have been $183,340.00.

The respondent, in her accident, sustained an injury in the nature of a Potts dislocation of the right ankle, an intra-articular fracture of the superior surface of the right oscalcis and a fracture of the subluxation of the right tabo navicular and calcineo cuboid joint complex. At the time she felt great pain in her right kneecap and left elbow and observed that her foot was at right-angles with itself. Her right knee caused problems. She was in hospital for two weeks, plaster was put on the whole leg from mid-thigh downwards. She has been operated on. She was given initially crutches and later a wheelchair. She now uses a stick. She resumed her practice (which had been very busy) after five or six weeks. Operating in these circumstances was extremely painful. This pain was to some extent, but not entirely, obviated by wearing men's shoes of different sizes, other special shoes, and an iron brace. She could no longer conduct operations in the operating theatre for long hours in these conditions. She was unable to drive her motor car for six months, and finds great difficulty in using public transport as an alternative. She has to walk slowly, has difficulty in negotiating steps and sometimes loses her balance. A later arthrodesis may or may not be necessary. She has also