Greenall v Amaca Pty Ltd

[2026] QSC 16

Supreme Court of Queensland

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Damages
2. › General principles
3. › Measure and remoteness of damages in actions for tort
4. › General damages
5. › Pain, suffering and loss of amenities of life
6. › Mesothelioma
7. › Whether court should have regard to jury verdicts in assessing general damages
8. › Whether court should have regard to interstate decisions including NSW Dust Diseases Tribunal
9. › Whether court should have regard to defamation case awards
10. › Succession Act 1981 (Qld), s 66
1. Damages
2. › General principles
3. › Loss of expectation of life
4. › Conventional sum
5. › Amount to be awarded
6. › Whether dated Queensland awards reflect modern values
1. Damages
2. › General principles
3. › Loss of amenity
4. › Loss of capacity to provide gratuitous services to others
5. › Whether loss of capacity to care for spouse with Alzheimer's disease compensable as part of general damages
6. › CSR Ltd v Eddy [2005] HCA 64
1. Damages
2. › General principles
3. › Comparable awards
4. › Relevance of one common law of Australia to consistency of damages assessments across jurisdictions
5. › Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions [1996] HCA 24
6. › Lipohar v R [1999] HCA 65

Quick Take

In Queensland, general damages for mesothelioma should be assessed having regard to jury verdicts, interstate decisions (including NSW DDT awards), and defamation case awards, applying the principle that there is one common law of Australia and that pain and suffering should not be valued differently across States.