What happened
A bus driver claimed physical symptoms and serious psychological disability following a 2015 collision for which fault was admitted. The trial judge disbelieved his account and supporting evidence, concluding that damages could not rationally be quantified.
The issues
The central issue was whether adverse credibility findings could coexist with acceptance of psychiatric diagnoses that already accounted for exaggeration. The court also considered the claimant's burden of proof and the limits of appellate intervention in factual findings.
The court's decision
The court did not overturn the finding of exaggeration, but rejected the assumption that this necessarily invalidated the diagnosis of major depression. It allowed the appeal and sought further submissions about damages. In 2022 the court assessed damages itself rather than ordering a retrial.
Understanding the figures
On 10 February 2022 the consequential judgment awarded historical AUD damages of $607,639.41, less $14,481.65 already paid by the insurer, giving a judgment sum of $593,157.76. Damages were assessed as at 20 December 2019; costs were left for submissions if not agreed.
What this case shows
An unreliable account and a compensable psychiatric illness require separate examination. The expert's reasoning, including any allowance for exaggeration, matters; credibility problems can still affect the amount ultimately assessed.
Why another case may differ
The case concerned the Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (NSW) regime applicable to the 2015 accident. The later assessment excluded non-economic loss and domestic assistance. The 2021 judgment itself did not award the amount below, and a psychiatric diagnosis did not establish every claimed loss.
Applying it to your claim
Different facts, evidence or procedures, an appeal, or a change in the law may affect how this decision applies. This is general information, not a report of a case handled by Park & Co Lawyers.
Considering a second opinion? →