LT v RT [2013] NSWDC 251

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: LT v RT [2013] NSWDC 251 Hearing dates: 24 September 2013 Decision date: 10 October 2013 Before: MJ Finnane QC DCJ Decision: See paragraphs [29] [30] Catchwords: CIVIL - tort - intentional - trespass to person - deliberate acts - intentional or wilful - assault - battery - sexual assault - aggravating factors Damages - jurisdictional limit - assessment Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 Cases Cited: Gray v The Motor Accidents Commission (1998-1999) 196 CLR 1 Richards v Conrford (2010) 76 NSWLR 573 Haddaway v Robinson & Ors [2010] NSWDC 188 Category: Principal judgment Parties: LT (Plaintiff) RT (Defendant) Representation: Mr K Andrews (Plaintiff) No appearance (Defendant) Wyatt Lawyers & Advisors (Plaintiff) No appearance (Defendant) File Number(s): 2013/178281

Judgment

Introduction 1The plaintiff claims damages from the defendant who is her father arising from his committing serious sexual assaults against her from the time she was four or five years old until the time she was 13 years old. He has admitted his guilt to a series of charges preferred against him and is now in gaol following a sentence of imprisonment passed upon him earlier this year by another Judge of the District Court of New South Wales. 2The plaintiff is an attractive, though fragile and distressed woman of 54 years. The Statement of Claim rolls up all the sexual assaults in a single cause of action which is particularised. This, as a matter of pleading, is clearly wrong since each individual assault was a separate tort and in respect of each one there is a separate cause of action. However, that will not have any effect on the outcome of the proceedings. I attach a schedule of the various offences committed on the plaintiff by the defendant. All are serious offences. Carnal knowledge of a child under the age of 10 years rendered the perpetrator liable to a sentence of life imprisonment. The offender could also have been charged with rape, which also carried a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. 3The defendant pleaded guilty to a number of charges, including carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of 10 years, when he was brought before the District Court for sentence and has failed to file any defence in the current civil proceedings. As a result, there judgment was entered against him and I am required to assess damages. 4The plaintiff seeks general damages as compensation for the wrong she suffered and aggravated general damages because of the nature of the sexual assaults. She does not seek exemplary damages because the defendant is serving a term of imprisonment and exemplary damages cannot be awarded to her (See Gray v the Motor Accident Commission (1998-1999 196 CLR 1.)