A plaintiff who has long been aware of the symptoms and consequences of a psychiatric condition — including violent behaviour, suicidal ideation, and belief that the condition is permanent — is not rendered unaware of the 'extent' of personal injury merely because a formal diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder is later given. The label of a psychiatric condition does not itself constitute an additional extent of injury. Even if a plaintiff passes through the s 60I(1) gateway, extensive pre-existing awareness of the condition and knowledge of the right to sue for compensation weigh heavily against a finding that extension is just and reasonable under s 60G(2).
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.