Cremona -v- RTA [2000] NSWSC 735

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Cremona -v- RTA [2000] NSWSC 735 FILE NUMBER(S) : SC W200075/94 HEARING DATE(S) : 17/7/00 - 20/7/00 JUDGMENT DATE : 25 July 2000

PARTIES : Minna Maarit Cremona Roads and Traffic Authority JUDGMENT OF : Dowd J at 1

COUNSEL : Mr B Toomey QC (P), Mr K Dodd SC Mr B Gross QC (D), Mr A Porthouse SOLICITORS : Corrs Chambers Westgarth Crown Solicitors CATCHWORDS : Compensation to relatives - assessment of damages - indemnity costs - recovery of costs of attendence at coronial inquest LEGISLATION CITED : Compensation to Relatives Act 1987 Damages (Infants and Persons of Unsound Mind Act) 1929 Multicon Engineering P/L -v- Federal Airports Corporation 138 ALR 425 Garcia -v- Fowler (unreported Dowd J 26 June 2000) CASES CITED : Fischer -v- David Syme Co & Ltd (1989) 18 NSWLR 606 GIO -v- Heally (1991) 22 NSWLR 380 McWilliams Wines Pty Ltd -v- Liaweena (NSW) Pty Ltd 32 NSWLR 190 DECISION : Judgment for the plaintiff; judgment to be apportioned between the plaintiff and her children; plaintiff awarded costs including on indemnity basis

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES (COMMON LAW DIVISION)

DOWD J

25 July 2000

No. W74/95 - Minna Maarit Cremona -v- RTA 1 The judgment as to the principle findings of fact was delivered on 20 June 2000, the matter then came before me on 17 July 2000 for further submissions. At that hearing the parties agreed that there were certain matters that still had to be resolved between them and calculations still had to be completed. 2 I subsequently on 19 July 2000 delivered a further judgment clarifying and giving further reasons for my decision of 20 June 2000. The parties then appeared before me on 20 July 2000 to make the further submissions arising from the hearing of 17 July 2000 and to make submissions consequent to the judgment handed down by me on 19 July 2000. 3 The defendant at the hearing of 20 July 2000 raised an issue concerning the date from at which the plaintiff's income would plateau and suggested that in my judgment of 19 July 2000 I used the expression the plaintiff uninjured "would slightly reduce his gross income by an amount to maintain his existing income" that that would mean that his income should be plateaued from 1 July 1996. 4 That was not the intention as set out in my judgment of 20 June 2000, I was of the view that he would take a partner from 1 July 1996 but that his income would continue to increase until 1998, being a continued growth of 2% and the agreed increase in Medicare fees and the plateau would then commence from 30 June 1998. 5 The plaintiff then sought clarification as to paragraph 104 of the judgment of 20 June 2000. 6 Paragraph 103 in fact sets out the findings of the Court. The formal dependency in terms of education and support ceased on the 23rd birthday of each child but the remaining dependency was then increased by half a percent to take into account the matters I referred to in my judgment on 17 July 2000. 7 Accordingly paragraph 104 has been included in error and is inconsistent with the earlier findings. I therefore withdraw paragraph 104. 8 Prior to the clarification of that matter the plaintiff submitted two summaries of loss. I indicated at the 20 July 2000 hearing that the Table 2 summary of those submitted was in fact the correct calculation. 9 That summary of loss was re-engrossed and tendered by agreement and I have admitted it as Exhibit W. The only variation from the submission made at the hearing of 20 July 2000 from Exhibit W, was the deletion of the loss of claim of goodwill which was formally withdrawn at the handing down of the judgment on 19 July 2000. 10 I have subsequently been advised that the parties have agreed as to the correctness of the calculations set out in the written submissions. I have also been advised by the plaintiff that the issue of a private trustee had been resolved and that it was now intended that the Public Trustee would be manager of the funds for the Cremona children.