Assessing Damages in Personal Injury Claims: Sometimes There Is More Than Meets the Eye

The recent case of Bauer v Clay in the Queensland Supreme Court presents a compelling examination of how Courts assess damages in personal injury claims. The Court’s Decision to award the Plaintiff over $600,000.00 in damages highlights the importance of credible evidence, expert testimony, and a thorough analysis of the Plaintiff’s loss.

The case arose from a high-speed motor vehicle collision on March 19, 2022, in Bundaberg, Queensland. The Plaintiff, an 18-year-old carpenter, was driving his vehicle when it was struck by a stolen car involved in a police pursuit. The collision caused significant damage to the Plaintiff’s vehicle, rendering it a total loss, and left him with injuries to his neck, upper thoracic spine, and right shoulder, as well as persistent headaches. The Judge (Justice Crow) had the benefit of viewing the Plaintiff’s dashcam footage and found “the motor vehicle accident was a high-velocity, high energy violent collision. It was the type of collision which could cause very serious personal injury.”

Despite the severity of the accident, the Plaintiff did not immediately seek medical attention. He later explained that his delay in seeking treatment was due to anxiety and a reluctance to visit doctors, as demonstrated by his medical history. It was only after his father’s insistence that he sought medical help, nearly a year after the accident. This delay in reporting his injuries became a key issue in the case, as the Court had to determine whether the Plaintiff’s injuries were causally linked to the accident.

The Court ultimately found in favour of the Plaintiff, relying on a combination of lay and expert evidence. The Plaintiff’s testimony was deemed credible and consistent with the medical evidence presented. Justice Crow commented, “The Plaintiff was quietly spoken, extremely understated in his complaints, and stoic”. Expert opinions from Orthopedic Surgeons confirmed the Plaintiff had sustained musculoligamentous injuries to his neck, resulting in an 8% whole person impairment. The Court also accepted evidence of a minor thoracic spine injury and ongoing physical limitations that affected the Plaintiff’s ability to perform heavy physical tasks and maintain full-time employment as a carpenter with his father.

In assessing damages, the Court conducted a detailed analysis of the Plaintiff’s pre-and post-accident earning capacity. Evidence from the Plaintiff’s family, colleagues, and an Occupational Therapist demonstrated that his injuries had significantly reduced his ability to work. The Court considered the Plaintiff’s historical work hours and pay rates, as well as the accommodations made by his employer (his father) to account for his reduced physical capabilities.

The case underscores the critical role of explanatory evidence in personal injury claims, particularly when there is a delay in reporting injuries. For Defendants, this Decision highlights the importance of looking beyond medical evidence when assessing damages. Testimonies from family members, colleagues, and Occupational Experts can provide valuable insights into the Plaintiff’s pre-and post-accident capabilities and economic loss. By presenting a comprehensive picture of the Plaintiff’s circumstances, Courts can arrive at an assessment of damages that may be unexpected by a Defendant who takes a narrow view of certain aspects of the medical evidence in the absence of explanation of the apparent deficiencies.