Tort; Negligence; remedies; damages; compensation for loss of amenities.
Facts: The plaintiff, aged 17, was involved in an accident. He suffered severe brain damage that left him permanently unconscious. At the trial (which took place two years after the accident) it was generally agreed that damages should be awarded on the basis that the plaintiff would live for only another six months. The trial judge awarded a sum for lost earnings and medical/hospital expenses up to the time of the trial, and another sum for future lost earning capacity and future expenses, both for a six-month period.
Issue: On appeal, the High Court had to consider various questions. One was whether a plaintiff made permanently unconscious (or permanently deprived of mental capacity) by his injuries is entitled to damages for the loss of enjoyment of life.
Decision: The plaintiff's unconsciousness should limit the damages awarded for loss of enjoyment of life.
Reason: Although English courts evaluate loss of amenities objectively, the High Court of Australia decided that a plaintiff is being compensated for their realisation that they have been deprived of the ability to enjoy life in the same way as before the accident - a subjective approach. Because the plaintiff in this case was permanently unconscious he was unaware of his own deprivation. Therefore only the modest amount of approximately $6,000 was awarded for loss of amenities.