Elford v FAI General Insurance Co Ltd

[1992] QCA 41

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Damages
2. › Measure of damages
3. › Fatal accident claims
4. › Loss of dependency
5. › Assessment of deceased's future earnings
6. › Whether Master's assessment of lost bonuses was supported by evidence
1. Appeal
2. › Appellate review of damages awards
3. › Error in one component of award
4. › Whether error in one component compels allowance of appeal where total award not wholly erroneous
5. › Test for appellate intervention
6. › Whether substitution of correct figure would substantially alter total award
1. Damages
2. › Measure of damages
3. › Fatal accident claims
4. › Prospects of remarriage of widow
5. › Whether allowance should be made for remarriage

Quick Take

An appellate court should not disturb a damages award merely because one component is shown to be wrong; the substitution of a correct figure must substantially alter the total award before intervention is warranted. The Keefe v Spring approach (following Lai Wee Lian) is to be preferred over the approach in Calder v Boyne Smelters. An error affecting only about 2% of the total award is insufficient to warrant correction.