WILMEN v NEW SOUTH WALES INSURANCE MINISTERIAL CORPORATION [1994] NSWCA 350

WILMEN v NEW SOUTH WALES INSURANCE MINISTERIAL CORPORATION

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL

KIRBY P, PRIESTLEY and MEAGHER JJA 10 October 1994, 10 October 1994 [1994] NSWCA 350

TRAFFIC ACCIDENT — impairment of capacity to work — whether impairment resulted in damage — assessment of future economic loss.

The appellant suffered serious orthopaedic injuries in a traffic accident and received damages including awards for pain and suffering, past economic loss and future economic loss. Held: (1) It may be accurate to say that the appellant's capacity to work was impaired but that impairment did not manifest itself in any damage in the period between the appellant's return to work and the trial. (2) The appropriate response to the medical

evidence in the light of the appellant's own evidence is that the award for future economic loss from the date of trial should be $90,000.

Kirby P I will ask Priestley JA to give the first opinion.

Priestley JA The appellant in this case suffered serious orthopaedic injuriesin a traffic accident on 12 January 1986. Her action for damages was heard and decided by Master Greenwood on 16 July 1993. The Master assessed her damages under the following headings: general damages for pain and suffering $80,000, past economic loss $12,923, interest on past economic loss $7754, future economic loss $40,000, allowance for shoe raisers $2628, allowance for future surgery $3000, treatment expenses, an agreed item, $13,322. These added up to $159,627 which the Master rounded off to $160,500 for which sum he directed entry of judgment.

The appellant has challenged the awards for general damages, past economic loss and future economic loss. These challenges are based on submissions that the Master erred in making two findings of fact.

One finding related to past economic loss, in regard to the claim for the period between the date the appellant returned to work after the accident and the date of trial. In regard to this the Master took the view that in the particular circumstances of the appellant's employment she had not in fact suffered any economic loss for that period.