This article outlines a recent decision in the matter of AAI Limited t/as GIO v Harvey [2024] NSWPIC 446.
On 19 August 2024, the New South Wales Personal Injury Commission (“PIC”) approved a settlement in favour of Mr Nathan Harvey, who was injured in a motor vehicle accident on 5 December 2020. The settlement, amounting to $635,000, was ultimately deemed just, fair, and reasonable by Member Elyse White.
Summary of Accident
Nathan Harvey, a 22-year-old university student, was a front-seat passenger in a 1998 Ford Fiesta driven by a friend. The vehicle was travelling along Namoi River Road, a narrow and unsealed dirt track in a rural area. While navigating the road, the driver lost control of the vehicle, which subsequently rolled multiple times down an embankment before coming to rest against a tree. The impact was severe, and Mr Harvey, who was wearing a seatbelt, suffered significant injuries, including a fracture to his cervical spine.
Mr Harvey was rendered unconscious. He was initially taken to Tamworth Hospital and later transferred to Royal North Shore Hospital in Sydney, where he underwent a C6 to T1 cervical fusion. Despite these medical interventions, Mr Harvey continues to experience persistent pain and limitations, particularly in his neck and left shoulder, and subsequently cannot participate in contact sports, which has affected his overall quality of life. He otherwise advises that he lives a normal lifestyle.
Legal Proceedings
Following the accident, Mr Harvey lodged a claim against AAI Limited t/as GIO, the CTP insurer of the at-fault driver’s vehicle, seeking damages for his injuries. The insurer accepted liability for the accident and acknowledged that Mr Harvey was entitled to compensation for both economic and non-economic losses. Since Mr Harvey was not represented by a lawyer, the proposed settlement required approval from the PIC under the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017 (NSW) (“the Act”).
Relevant Law
The settlement approval was governed by section 6.23(2) and (3) of the Act. According to the Act, and as outlined in the Motor Accident Guidelines, the PIC must ensure that any settlement is just, fair, and reasonable. This includes considering the nature and extent of the claimant’s injuries and the potential for future loss of earning capacity. The PIC must also confirm that the claimant fully understands the settlement terms and accepts them willingly.
Review of Evidence
At the time of the accident, Mr Harvey was studying commerce and economics at Macquarie University and supporting himself by working two part-time jobs at McDonald’s and a strata management company. Upon completion of his degree, he intended to attain and maintain full-time employment. The injuries sustained in the accident required significant medical treatment, including a second surgery to address complications from the initial cervical fusion. Following the accident, Mr Harvey did not return to his employment at McDonald’s and took three months off from his strata management role.
Despite his injuries, Mr Harvey was able to resume his studies and work part-time, though with ongoing pain and physical limitations. He still intends to transition to full-time work once he completes his university studies.
Medical assessments conducted by Associate Professor Phil Truskett indicated that Mr Harvey had a whole person impairment of 26%, due to a soft tissue injury to his left shoulder and the cervical fracture. Although the medical expert opined that Mr Harvey could continue in his current employment, there was an acknowledgment by the CTP insurer that he may face future challenges in his career due to his injuries.
PIC Proceedings & Decision
During the proceedings, the PIC reviewed the settlement proposal from the CTP insurer of $300,000 for non-economic loss. After Member Whyte raised that this may not be a sufficient enough amount to accurately reflect the severity and long-term impact of Mr Harvey’s injuries, this amount was increased to $375,000.
The settlement also included $37,000 for past economic loss and $223,000 for future economic loss, recognising that Mr Harvey’s work life expectancy could be affected by his injuries. The total settlement amount was agreed upon at $635,000, of which Mr Harvey will receive $627,916.25 after statutory benefits are deducted (statutory benefits being the payments that the CTP insurer initially made to Mr Harvey for his past loss of income).
Member Elyse White approved the settlement, confirming that it was within the range of likely potential damages if the case had proceeded to assessment. She expressed satisfaction that Mr Harvey fully understood the implications of the settlement and was content with the outcome, which finalises his entitlements to further common law damages under the Act.
We consider this case a prime example of how the PIC can assist in obtaining just and equitable settlements, particularly where the Claimant may be unrepresented (i.e. proceed without a lawyer). Notwithstanding the successful outcome, we consider that it is best to engage a lawyer to help with the following:
- decreasing the stress involved in litigation;
- ensuring that your case is prepared with a view to obtaining the maximum compensation; and
- ensuring that you receive proper compensation at the earliest opportunity.
How We Can Help
If you or someone you know has been involved in a motor vehicle accident and suffered injuries, it is important to understand your legal rights and options. At The Law Office of Conrad Curry, we specialise in personal injury claims, including motor accident compensation. Our experienced team can guide you through the complex legal process, ensuring you receive the compensation you deserve.
We offer a free initial consultation whereby we will assess your case and provide you with clear, straightforward advice on the best course of action. Whether you need help with negotiating a settlement or taking your case to court, we are here to support you every step of the way.
Don’t navigate this challenging time alone—let us help you secure the financial support you need to move forward with your life.
DISCLAIMER
This article reflects the current law at the time of publication. It is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The actual decisions in each case are summarised for general understanding. For specific legal guidance in relation to your situation, please consult with a qualified legal professional.
