Matthews v Hollis [2002] NSWCA 156

New South Wales Court of Appeal

CITATION : Matthews v Hollis [2002] NSWCA 156 FILE NUMBER(S) : CA 40642/01 HEARING DATE(S) : 8 April 2002 JUDGMENT DATE : 27 May 2002

PARTIES : Douglas George Matthews (Appellant) Neville Hollis (Respondent) JUDGMENT OF : Stein JA at 1; Heydon JA at 2

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT DC 125/99 FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT Patten DCJ JUDICIAL OFFICER :

COUNSEL : Mr B M J Toomey QC/Ms M Kumar (Appellant) Mr R R Bartlett SC (Respondent) SOLICITORS : Stacks - The Law Firm (Appellant) Hunt & Hunt (Respondent) CATCHWORDS : ND LEGISLATION CITED : Motor Accidents Act 1988 DECISION : The appeal is dismissed; the appellant is to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL CA 40642/01 DC 125/99

STEIN JA HEYDON JA

27 May 2002

DOUGLAS GEORGE MATTHEWS v NEVILLE HOLLIS Judgment

1 STEIN JA: I agree with Heydon JA. 2 HEYDON JA: This is an appeal by the plaintiff below against the quantum of damages awarded to him by Patten DCJ on 24 July 2001 after a trial on 14, 16 and 17 May 2001. The appellant was seriously injured in a motor vehicle accident on 30 July 1998 in which his neck was broken; the respondent admitted liability; the trial judge awarded damages in the sum of $336,074.61. 3 Of the items making up that figure, the appellant contends that the awards for non-economic loss ($113,500) and diminished future earning capacity ($80,000) were erroneous. Because the evidence relating to each category to some extent overlaps it is convenient to consider them together. There were grounds of appeal and written submissions contending that the trial judge gave too little for domestic assistance, but those contentions were abandoned when the appeal was called on for oral argument.