The circumstance that domestic services needed by an injured plaintiff are supplied by a family member as part of the fair give-and-take of family life does not reduce Griffiths v Kerkemeyer damages; the earlier NSWCA decisions in Lolomanaia and Matchan v Lyons to the contrary should not be followed. For damages to be awarded for the care of family pets, the plaintiff must prove a 'need' for those services that goes beyond mere desire and is reasonably necessary for the plaintiff's well-being. Under s 151Z(1)(d), the cap on the employer's indemnity is reduced only by amounts actually recovered under the indemnity, not by statute-barred amounts that the employer failed to claim in time.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.