NSW Caselaw
New South Wales District Court
CITATION: Mantzios v Mount Pritchard District & Community Club Limited [2010] NSWDC 70
HEARING DATE(S): 15, 16, 17 and 18 September 2009 and 14, 15, 16, 28, 29 and 30 October 2009
JUDGMENT DATE: 30 April 2010
JURISDICTION: Civil
JUDGMENT OF: Bozic SC DCJ
DECISION: 1. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $219,409. 2. The defendants are to pay the plaintiff's costs on the ordinary basis up to and including 28 July 2009 and on an indemnity basis from 29 July 2009 to date.
CATCHWORDS: TORTS - trespass to person - assault - whether plaintiff assaulted by security guard at club - CAUSATION - two independent assaults occurring within minutes - whether second assault caused or contributed to the plaintiff's injuries - DAMAGES - award of compensatory, aggravated and exemplary damages
Manly Council v Byrne [2004] NSWCA 123 CASES CITED: Paric v John Holland Constructions Pty Ltd [1984] 2 NSWLR 505 Roads and Traffic Authority v Royal [2008] HCA 19; (2008) ALR 653
Nickolas Mantzios, plaintiff PARTIES: Mount Pritchard District & Community Club Limited, first defendant CPR Security Specialists Pty Ltd, second defendant
FILE NUMBER(S): 1363/08
COUNSEL: Mr P Maiden SC with Mr C Sandrasegara for Plaintiff Mr G Grant for First and Second Defendants
SOLICITORS: Anthony Porthouse Kheir & Associates Solicitors for Plaintiff Lee & Lyons Lawyers for First and Second Defendants
Introduction 1 On the evening of 11 June 2005 three young men in their early twenties, the plaintiff, his cousin Mr Joseph Mallia and a friend, Mr Phillip Martin, went to the Mount Pritchard District &Community Club ("the Club"). The Club is the first defendant in these proceedings. At about 11.00 pm the three men went into a nightclub at the Club called Fuze ("the nightclub"). While in the nightclub, the plaintiff was allegedly assaulted by one of the security guards at the Club, a Mr Tahu Frost. Mr Frost was employed by the second defendant. Following the alleged assault the three men were ejected from the premises by the security guards. The plaintiff was driven by car to the Emergency Department at Fairfield Hospital. He was not admitted to the Hospital and after being examined by a doctor was allowed to go home.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate