Lewin v Gould & Anor

[2015] QCA 107

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Appeal
2. › Leave to appeal
3. › District Court civil matters
4. › Requirements for leave under s 118 District Court of Queensland Act 1967
5. › Whether appeal necessary to correct substantial injustice
6. › Whether reasonable argument of error to be corrected
1. Appeal
2. › Interference with findings of fact
3. › Preference for one expert witness over another
4. › Whether primary judge erred in accepting one orthopaedic specialist's evidence over another
1. Damages
2. › Personal injury
3. › Whiplash injury
4. › Future economic loss
5. › Whether ongoing symptoms causally related to accident
6. › Whether refusal of future economic loss claim was erroneous

Quick Take

A primary judge's preference for one expert witness over another, based on more relevant expertise and the reliability of the factual assumptions underlying each expert's opinion, provides a solid evidentiary foundation that will not be disturbed on appeal. Once a factual finding is made that ongoing symptoms are not causally related to an accident, a claim for future economic loss necessarily fails.

Case Details

Citation[2015] QCA 107

CourtQCA

JurisdictionQueensland

Unlock so much more with Barrister AI

The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.

1 of the 1 citing case carries a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.

Cited by1

2026Onward Energy Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) v SharmaQSC 148

Relies on3

2010Mbuzi v HornbyQCA 186
2005Pickering v McArthurQCA 294
and 1 more after sign-in

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in