Peebles v WorkCover Queensland

[2021] QCA 21

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Damages
2. › Measure and remoteness of damages in actions for tort
3. › Personal injuries
4. › Loss of earnings and earning capacity
5. › Discount for contingencies
6. › Pre-existing degenerative condition
7. › Whether same discount rate applicable to past and future economic loss
8. › Whether 50 per cent discount on past economic loss was so unreasonable as to infer error
1. Damages
2. › Measure and remoteness of damages in actions for tort
3. › Personal injuries
4. › Loss of earnings and earning capacity
5. › Multiplicand for future economic loss
6. › Whether trial judge erred in adopting lower weekly earnings figure than supported by evidence
1. Appeal
2. › Standard of appellate review
3. › Discretionary judgment on assessment of damages
4. › Whether discretionary judgment so unreasonable that error should be inferred

Quick Take

Where a plaintiff has a pre-existing condition that may have caused future incapacity, the contingency discount applied to past economic loss must be significantly lower than that applied to future economic loss, because the plaintiff's actual health during the past period is known and many contingencies did not materialise. A trial judge who applies the same discount to both past and future economic loss without accounting for this distinction commits an appealable error. Additionally, where the evidence supports a particular weekly earnings figure and the parties have agreed on that figure for past loss, the trial judge must provide an identifiable explanation for adopting a lower figure for future loss.