Edquist v Morewood

[2005] ACTCA 25

ACT Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Damages
2. › Personal injury
3. › General damages
4. › Loss of enjoyment of life
5. › Elite athlete
6. › Whether trial judge's assessment of impact supported by evidence
7. › Role of demeanour in assessment of damages
1. Appeal
2. › Standard of appellate review
3. › Appeal from assessment of damages
4. › Discretionary assessment
5. › Whether appellate court should interfere with trial judge's assessment
1. Damages
2. › Personal injury
3. › Mitigation
4. › Refusal to undergo surgery
5. › Whether plaintiff's refusal to undergo surgery with guarded prognosis should reduce damages

Quick Take

A trial judge assessing damages for loss of enjoyment of life may find the impact to be greater than the plaintiff's own description of it, based on demeanour and objective comparison of pre- and post-accident capabilities. The influence of demeanour on the assessment need not be expressly stated in the reasons. A plaintiff's reasonable refusal to undergo surgery with a guarded prognosis does not warrant reduction of damages.

Case Details

Citation[2005] ACTCA 25

CourtACTCA

JurisdictionAustralian Capital Territory

Unlock so much more with Barrister AI

The full text is available to signed-in members.

Relies on1

1990Malec v JC Hutton Pty LtdHCA 20

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in