PAREEZER v COCA-COLA AMATIL [2004] NSWSC 825

Reported Decision : (2004) Aust Torts Reports 81-772

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : PAREEZER v COCA-COLA AMATIL [2004] NSWSC 825 HEARING DATE(S) : 03.09.03-19.09.03; 1.12.03 JUDGMENT DATE : 10 September 2004

JUDGMENT OF : Hulme J at 1 DECISION : Orders deferred

Plaintiff: Craig Douglas Pareezer PARTIES : Suzanne Joy Pareezer Scott Craig Pareezer Defendant: Coca-Cola Amatil (NSW) Pty Ltd FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 20018/00 Plaintiff: J Rowe; J Darvall Defendant: MA Elkaim SC; A Bowen COUNSEL : TAFE Commission: AC Bridge SC; A Ventura Pareezer Transport P/L: M Cochrane GIO: R Ferrari Heazlewoods Henry Davis York SOLICITORS : Hicksons Kevin O'Kane Thompson Cooper

- 27 - IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION

HULME J

Friday 10 September 2004 20018/2000 CRAIG DOUGLAS PAREEZER v COCA-COLA AMATIL (NSW) PTY LIMITED JUDGMENT 1 HULME J: The evidence and issues which arise have been considered under the following headings:- Para 1. Outline 1 2. Events preceding to the Plaintiff going to TAFE on 17/2/1997. 28 3. The Shooting itself and the Assailants Movements 42 4. The Relationship between Plaintiff and Defendant 51 5. Workers Compensation Claims 87 6. Risks, Prior Problems and the Defendant's Knowledge 88 7. The "Gang" and Mr Adriano Manna 111 8. Expert Evidence – Liability 120 9. Findings - Mr Manna and the Shooting 137 10. Findings – The Relationship between the Plaintiff, Defendant 148 and Pareezer Transport Pty Ltd 11. Foreseeability, Duty & Negligence 164 12. The Second and Third Plaintiffs. 194 13. Impact on the Plaintiff 199 14. Impact on the Second and Third Plaintiffs 237 15. General Damages & Interest thereon 246 16. Out-of-Pocket Expenses 249 17. Fox v Wood 251 18. Care 252 19. Economic Loss 257 20. Claims of Second and Third Plaintiffs. 258 21. Cross-Claims – Summary 263 22. The Second Cross-Claim 269 23. The Fifth Cross-Claim 273 24. The Sixth Cross-Claim 285