The ACT Court of Appeal held that where a trial judge requests assistance in identifying a non-appellable range of general damages, it falls within counsel's duty to the court to provide such submissions, and counsel should not accept instructions from an insurer-defendant to decline that assistance. The Court confirmed that while no tariff exists for general damages, reference to comparable awards as a guide is permissible and appropriate, consistent with Planet Fisheries and [name withheld] v [name withheld]. The appeal was resolved by consent, substituting general damages of $31,500 for the trial judge's award of $12,000, which the respondent conceded was inadequate.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.