BJ by his next friend Brian Edward Jones v Wilcox & Anor [2008] NSWSC 1332

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : BJ by his next friend Brian Edward Jones v Wilcox & Anor [2008] NSWSC 1332

HEARING DATE(S) : 9 December 2008

JUDGMENT DATE : 11 December 2008

JUDGMENT OF : Hoeben J

DECISION : Judgment in favour of the plaintiff against the first defendant in the amount of $12,949,505.45. First defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs of these proceedings.

CATCHWORDS : Tort - assault on an infant - assessment of damages - non-application of Civil Liability Act 2002

LEGISLATION CITED : Civil Liability Act 2002

CATEGORY : Principal judgment

CASES CITED : Griffiths v Kerkemeyer (1977) 139 CLR 161

PARTIES : BJ by his next friend Brian Edward Jones - Plaintiff Graham Nathan Wilcox - First Defendant

FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 20286/2005

COUNSEL : Mr PA Regattieri - Plaintiff Ex parte hearing

SOLICITORS : MJ Duffy & Sons - Plaintiff

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION

HOEBEN J

Thursday, 11 December 2008

20286/2005 – BJ by his next friend Brian Edward JONES v Graham Nathan WILCOX and Anor

JUDGMENT 1 HIS HONOUR: Nature of Proceedings The plaintiff was born in October 2001. On 29 July 2002 he was savagely assaulted by his mother's de facto partner, who is the first defendant in these proceedings. As a result of the assault, the plaintiff suffered very serious injuries, including brain damage. He has brought proceedings against the first defendant seeking damages for the injuries which he suffered. 2 Default judgment against the first defendant was entered in favour of the plaintiff on 28 September 2005. 3 The first defendant is presently serving a sentence of imprisonment, as a result of the assault on the plaintiff. The matter now before the Court is the assessment of the plaintiff's damages against the first defendant. The matter proceeded ex parte. 4 Evidence was placed before the Court which satisfied me that the first defendant is not only aware that the proceedings for the assessment of damages were to be heard on 9 December 2008 but that he was agreeable to that taking place. This was made clear in a letter which he sent to the plaintiff's solicitors dated 19 October 2006.