GLORIA CLARK v GOVERNMENT INSURANCE OFFICE OF NSW [1993] NSWCA 60

GLORIA CLARK v GOVERNMENT INSURANCE OFFICE OF NSW SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES — COURT OF APPEAL

CLARKE JA, MEAGHER JA and HANDLEY JA 1 November 1993

[1993] NSWCA 60 DAMAGES — NO QUESTION OF PRINCIPLE

Clarke JA. The appellant was injured on 3 December 1985 when she was involved in a motor vehicle accident at Belfield. She asserted that her injuries had been received as a result of the negligence of another driver and sued to recover damages.

Her case was heard by Judge Patten who awarded her $196,902. She has appealed from that award and in her appeal she has challenged the allowance for future economic loss and for future household expenditure. She has also asserted that his Honour was in error in failing to allow her the costs of psychotherapy upon which the finding made by his Honour, in the appellant's submission, depended, and she has complained that there was no allowance by his Honour for past household expenditure which, on his findings, followed automatically. The last point would lead, if upheld, to an increase in the judgment of $7,319, including interest.

Mr Petty, counsel for the respondent, has conceded that his Honour erred in failing to allow for past household assistance and that the judgment should, accordingly, be increased by the amount I have stated. It is convenient at this stage to deal with the claim for future household assistance.

The appellant gave evidence that she was paying out $25 per week for household assistance and that the medical evidence supported the conclusion that she was unlikely ever to be able to do more in the house than she was doing now. Accordingly, so the submission went, it was appropriate to allow her $25 per week for the rest of her life, less any appropriate discount. An allowance assessed on that basis would be about $20,000 — $23,000. Accordingly, in awarding the appellant only $10,000 his Honour had discounted her claim by far more than was properly permissible in the circumstances.