What happened
The plaintiff injured his back in January 2012 when a railing on which he sat gave way. The Council admitted liability, and the quantum hearing concerned continuing pain, restrictions on heavy work and reduced recreation despite his ongoing work and increased business earnings.
The issues
The trial court considered whether a buffer for future earning-capacity loss was justified despite increased current income. The appeal examined the severity assessment, the assumptions behind future loss and the evidence of likely paid domestic assistance.
The court's decision
The trial judge accepted the plaintiff's credibility and allowed non-economic and future economic loss among other heads. On appeal, non-economic loss and future economic loss were reduced and future paid care removed; the majority allowed 75,000 for future economic loss, producing judgment for 136,419.
Understanding the figures
The AUD 278,392 trial award did not survive unchanged. [2015] NSWCA 243 substituted 136,419, preserved the trial costs order and required the plaintiff to pay 75% of the Council's appeal costs. The 70,000 payment condition in [2014] NSWCA 403 concerned a stay pending appeal, not an additional award.
What this case shows
Increased post-injury income does not rule out future loss of earning capacity. A buffer nevertheless requires scrutiny of the facts underlying medical opinions, remaining working life and functional limits rather than reliance on an untested concern about early retirement.
Why another case may differ
The assigned judgment is the 2014 trial decision, whose damages were later changed on appeal. Liability was admitted, and the historical Civil Liability Act assessment does not supply a current tariff or establish a general rule about defective railings.
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? →