Hall v State of New South Wales (Department of Corrective Services) Hall v State of New South Wales (No 2) [2013] NSWDC 96

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Hall v State of New South Wales (Department of Corrective Services) Hall v State of New South Wales (No 2) [2013] NSWDC 96 Hearing dates: 31/05/2013 Decision date: 31 May 2013 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Elkaim SC DCJ Decision: See paragraphs 6 and 7 Catchwords: Psychiatric injury, school in maximum security juvenile prison, causation. Legislation Cited: Civil Liability Act 2002 District Court Act 1973 Workers Compensation Act 1987 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Sally Hall (Plaintiff) State of New South Wales (Department of Corrective Services) State of New South Wales (Department of Education & Communities) Representation: A Black SC and E Welsh (Plaintiff) E Brus (Defendant) I Roberts SC (Defendant) Federation Law (Plaintiff) Crown Solicitor's Office (NSW) (Defendant) Leslie Hargrave Pty Ltd (Defendant) File Number(s): 2010/00347906 2011/00152206 Publication restriction: Suppression order relating to the names of inmates in the Juvenile Correction Centre. Suppression order relating to the publication of Exhibit C

EX TEMPORE 1HIS HONOUR: I gave judgment in this matter on 21 May 2013. The results of the judgment were verdicts in favour of the plaintiff against each defendant. The final verdict sums are set out in paragraphs 121 and 122 of the judgment. 2The verdict sum in respect of the action against the Department of Corrective Services was a product of a calculation under section 151Z(2) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987. 3In order to reach the figure necessary to be inserted in paragraph 119(b) of my judgment, workers' compensation payments were deducted from the damages assessed against the Department of Education and Communities. This calculation is set out in paragraph 118 of the judgment. 4The calculation was a product of the parties agreeing that was the way it ought to proceed. The parties, upon further consideration, have reached the conclusion that the calculation in paragraph 118 was not correct and that the workers' compensation payments, at least for the purposes of the s 151Z(2) calculation, should not have been deducted. 5I have been provided with the figures that should have been placed in paragraph 119 and asked to amend the judgment sum. 6Accordingly, I have produced the paragraphs as they now should be and will include pages 29 and 30 as part of this judgment. 7I will also amend the judgment sum in respect of proceedings 2010/347906 to $857,324.64. 8I note that everything I have done is with the consent of all parties.