NSW Caselaw
Dust Diseases Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Single v Workers Compensation Nominal Insurer [2018] NSWDDT 9 Hearing dates: 22 November 2018 Date of orders: 30 November 2018 Decision date: 30 November 2018 Before: Russell SC DCJ Decision: (1) The plaintiff is entitled to a judgment against the defendant in an amount to be agreed between the parties, to be calculated by deducting the amount of NZD 136,705.79 from agreed damages of $A415,000. (2) I direct the parties to bring in a form of order to reflect this finding. (3) Costs reserved. Catchwords: DUST DISEASES – damages – mesothelioma – whether lump sum benefit should be deducted from damages – Accident Compensation Act 2001 (NZ)
DAMAGES – double compensation – injured party should receive compensation which will put that party in the same position he or she would have been in had the tort not been committed – financial source of the benefit – whether benefit must be repaid – nature of the benefit Legislation Cited: Accident Compensation Act 2001 (NZ) Dust Diseases Tribunal Act 1999 Health and Disability Commissioner Act 1994 (NZ) Human Rights Act 1993 (NZ) Pneumoconiosis (Workers Compensation) Act 1979 (UK) Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 (UK) Workers' Compensation (Dust Diseases) Act 1942 Cases Cited: Davis v Cockatoo Dockyard Pty Ltd [2000] NSWDDT 6; (2000) 19 NSWCCR 594 Haines v Bendall [1991] HCA 15; (1991) 172 CLR 60 Harris v Commercial Minerals Limited [1996] HCA 49; (1996) 186 CLR 1 Manser v Spry [1994] HCA 50; (1994) 181 CLR 428 McGougan v Depuy International Limited [2018] NZCA 91; [2018] 2 NZLR 916 National Insurance Co. of New Zealand Limited v Espagne [1961] HCA 15; (1961) 105 CLR 569 Neilson v Overseas Projects Corporation of Victoria Ltd [2005] HCA 54; (2005) 223 CLR 331 Queenstown Lakes District Council v Palmer [1998] NZCA 190; [1999] 1 NZLR 549 White v Amaca Pty Limited [2011] NSWDDT 6 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Colleen Elva Single (Plaintiff) Workers Compensation Nominal Insurer (Second Defendant) Representation: Counsel: J Fernon SC with A Giurtalis (Plaintiff) D Toomey SC (Second Defendant)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate