ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES

Similar documents
SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE AND [1] GARY TRUBBIE DE FREITAS [2] MICHAEL EMMONS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. BETWEEN: WILLIAM BING MALONE (by his next friend Orpha Malone) and JEROME MICHAEL

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (CIVIL) AND. 2009: June 29 July 3 JUDGMENT ON ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND MERLIN HARROO AND. LELTUS MANNETTE (wrongly sued as KELTIIS MANNETTE) AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTIICE JOHN WALKER LISA WALKER. And PERRY ALAMA GOMES ENTERPRISES LTD AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM INC

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GRENADA AND THE WEST INDIES ASSOCIATED STATES HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Clinton Belfon AND. [1] CPL #48 Alex Fletcher

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA CASEY PIGOTT SHERRIAN PIGOTT. and VELELOMA POTTER VERNON POTTER

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F MARVIN G. WOODBERRY, EMPLOYEE H & H CONCRETE CO., EMPLOYER

The Attorney General 1. Hence a claimant can claim both pecuniary and non-pecuniary REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F PAUL CUNNINGHAM, Employee. KEN S TRUCK & REFRIGERATION SERVICE, Employer

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. E BOST HUMAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICE OPINION FILED JUNE 1, 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Sub-Registry, San Fernando BETWEEN. And JAYSON HERNANDEZ CAPITAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G CHERITA WILLIAMS, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED FEBRUARY 21, 2017

GEORGE HUTCHINSON EVERETT O SULLIVAN. Interlocutory application - Amendment to particulars of claim after end of relevant limitation period

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. And

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G LEROY DORN, EMPLOYEE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF PINE BLUFF, EMPLOYER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE FRANCIS MAURICE. and (1) CLARENCE MAN GAL (2) NIER SAMUEL (3) RUTH DUBOIS (4) EVIS NAITRAM (5) JOHN ALEXANDER JUDGEMENT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GRENADA AND THE WEST INDIES ASSOCIATED STATES HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. 1. Damon Dubois. and

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND ERROL BOODRAM TRADING AS PRICE RIGHT FURNITURE FACTORY

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D. 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. and. 2007: November 1 st, 29 th

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D. 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between ANDY MARCELLE. And THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F ANNA STIELER, Employee. ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING PRODUCT, Employer RESPONDENT #1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG, PRETORIA)

OSLEY BAPTISTE C.K. GREAVES AND COMPANY LIMITED

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F GEORGE S. KING, EMPLOYEE WYLIE CONSTRUCTION, UNINSURED EMPLOYER

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) M.F. A. NO. 90/2005

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. And CALVERT FLEMING ALVIN WHITE

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F OPINION FILED AUGUST 1, 2003

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F LATOYA NESBITT, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT OUACHITA COUNTY MED. CTR., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F DORIS CIENFUEGOS, Employee. SUPERIOR INDUSTRIES, Employer

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

J Tc - -CHcVHR 13 MOT APPLICABLE I (1) REPORTABLE Vfe$/NO I. {2> ^ INTSREST t o o t h e r ju dg es fe s /N o!

Jefferson v Montefiore Med. Group 2014 NY Slip Op 33417(U) December 15, 2014 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket Number: /11 Judge: Douglas E.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA)

Benyuan Zhou, Likang Zhou and Mansoor Bayat-Shahbazi, Defendants. Thomas Ozere and Erin Durant, for the Respondent ENDORSEMENT

Plaintiff : CASE NO Judge Joseph T. Clark v. : Magistrate Anderson M. Renick

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

In the High Court of Justice CARYN SOBERS. and

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN KESTON KIRK AND CARIBBEAN AIRLINES LIMITED BETWEEN NATHALIE DUNCAN-MONDESIR AND CARIBBEAN AIRLINES LIMITED

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. E KATHLEEN T. CORDRY, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G JAMIE MOHR, EMPLOYEE

Lindsay-Thompson v Montefiore Med. Ctr NY Slip Op 31761(U) August 19, 2015 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket Number: /10 Judge: Douglas

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F OPINION FILED AUGUST 14, 2003

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.VEERAPPA. M.F.A.NO.20063/2011 (MV) C/w. M.F.A. CROB.NO.

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F CHARLES NUNN, Employee. EXPRESS FLEET MAINTENANCE, Employer

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. G BILLY A. TAYLOR, EMPLOYEE FIBER SOLUTIONS, INC., EMPLOYER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE DENISE VIOLET STEVENS

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F JEREMY G. PRATT, EMPLOYEE DITTA DOOR & HARDWARE, INC.,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND

FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE # 80 FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F TRAVIS L. ROSS, EMPLOYEE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

3. Mrs Taylor s daughter, Crystal, witnessed her mother s sudden collapse and death. As a result of the shock she developed significant PTSD.

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F OPINION FILED FEBRUARY 9, 2005

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F AAC RISK MANAGEMENT SERVICES INSURANCE CARRIER OPINION FILED AUGUST 4, 2004

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F MICHELLE L. LIVELY, EMPLOYEE EATON CORPORATION, EMPLOYER

INVALID CARE ALLOWANCE (JERSEY) ORDER 2008

FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 01/26/ :17 PM INDEX NO /2016E NYSCEF DOC. NO. 48 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/26/2018

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM F MATTHEW CHRISTOPHER HARGIS, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT

Supreme Court of Louisiana

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NOS. F & F TIMMY J. HENSLEY, EMPLOYEE

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F KENNETH HONEY CLAIMANT OPINION FILED JUNE 27, 2007

Ombudsman s Determination

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F FAYETTEVILLE VETERANS HOME PUBLIC EMPLOYEE CLAIMS DIVISION, INSURANCE CARRIER

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F J. B. HUNT TRANSPORT RESPONDENT

CCG CO10; Mental Capacity Act Policy

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

1. Who is eligible for State compensation?

Dyer, Jimmy R. v. Johnny Morris d/b/a Morris Logging

PATRICIA JULIANA VAN DER WESTHUIZEN JUDGMENT. [1] The plaintiff was a rear seat passenger in a motor vehicle which was involved

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION AWCC NO. F MARY JONES, EMPLOYEE WAL-MART ASSOCIATES, INC., EMPLOYER

Date: July 17, In Re: Dear

ORAL JUDGEMENT BETWEEN RASHAKA BROOKS JNR. CLAIMANT (A MINOR) BY RASHAKA BROOKS SNR.

Louisiana Workers Compensation Decisions December 2017 By Patrick F. Robinson

REPUBLIC OF KENYA. High Court at Nairobi (Nairobi Law Courts) Civil Case 788 of 2000 E. R. O...PLAINTIFF V E R S U S

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F DALE W. CLARK, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED JUNE 21, 2004

NEW SECTIONS AND REGULATIONS OF THE RAF ACT SINCE 1 AUGUST 2008 CHALLENGED:

THE EASTERN CARIBEAN COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA

STATE OF FLORIDA DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS OFFICE OF THE JUDGES OF COMPENSATION CLAIMS FT. LAUDERDALE DISTRICT OFFICE

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F CARRIE RAPER, EMPLOYEE DREW MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, EMPLOYER

FIJI ISLANDS HIGH COURT ACT (CHAPTER 13) HIGH COURT (AMENDMENT) RULES 1998

Scales, Elijah v. Michael Sherlock

IN THE CARIBBEAN COURT OF JUSTICE Appellate Jurisdiction ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL OF GUYANA TULSIERAM DUKHI. Mr Justice Anderson

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F CURTIS W. WALLACE, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F DANIEL R. POWELL, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED FEBRUARY 23, 2009

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D. 2002

The overriding objective.. Rule 1.1 Application of the overriding objective by the court Rule 1.2 Duty of parties.rule 1.3

JUDGMENT. [1] The plaintiff claims payment of R ,00 against the defendant

Chandanais v Ryan 2010 NY Slip Op 32202(U) August 18, 2010 Supreme Court, Broome County Docket Number: Judge: Ferris D. Lebous Republished

[us-iss so-it)-----~ J

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE DYIAL LATCHMAN CLAIMANT AND BALGOBIN & SONS BANDSAWMILLING COMPANY LIMITED DEFENDANT

Dupree, Andrew v. Tepro, Inc.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS OF :Versus:

Transcription:

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE ANGUILLA Claim Number: AXAHCV2001/0059 Between CELINA FLEMING And Claimant PHOENIX FLEMING Defendant Before: Master Cheryl Mathurin Appearances: Caribbean Associated Attorneys for the Claimant Ms Paulette Harrigan for the Defendant 2006:0ctober 18 th, 2008: January 23 rd ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES [1 J MATHURIN, MASTER: It would be remiss of me not to mention the length of time it has taken to deliver this assessment and to apologise for any inconvenience it may have caused. On the 28 th August 1999, the Claimant, Ms Fleming, who was 35 at the time, was seated in the back of a pick up truck driven by the Defendant, Mr Fleming. Ms Fleming fell out of the pick up when Mr Fleming was negotiating a corner and as a result suffered several injuries, some of which are permanent and she has claimed in this action damages for those injuries which she alleges were caused by the negligence of Mr Fleming. Mr. Fleming filed no defence to the Claim and Judgment in Default was consequently entered against him on the 23 rd October 2002. An application to set aside this Judgment was later dismissed and the Parties were subsequently asked to file submissions as to the quantum of damages that should be awarded to Ms Fleming for her injuries and loss. [2] On the question of general damages. the law is settled. The case of Cornilliac v St Louis (1965) 7 WIR 491 is the locus classicus on this point and Wooding CJ set out the considerations to be borne in mind in assessing general damages; (a) The nature and extent of the injuries sustained

(b) (c) (d) (e) The nature and gravity of the resulting physical disability The pain and suffering experienced The loss of amenities if any The extent to which pecuniary prospects are affected [3] Further, applying the principles in Heeralall v Hack Bros. (1977) 15 WIR 117, the law expects an award of fair compensation, fair to Ms Fleming for what has happened to her through the negligence of the Mr Fleming and fair for the Mr Fleming to pay for such negligence. Such damages cannot be perfect compensation, but it will be fair compensation for her injuries and for the social, economic and domestic consequences to her. I must consider therefore, the nature and extent of the injuries that Ms Fleming sustained and the effect that this has had on her health. I must also consider her past pain and suffering, any future pain and suffering that she will experience and any curtailment in her living that the injury has produced. [4J The first medical report submitted by Ms Fleming and prepared by Dr Madhu Thottambeti on the 8 th August 2000, reveals that upon examination after the accident, Ms Fleming was "stuporous with Glasgow Coma - scale 11115" with external injuries as follows; "1. Eyelids were swollen and conjunctival congestion present over right side 2. Punctured wound present over right side of face 3. Abrasions over both wrists 4. No bony or Body deformity was present. " Ms Fleming was released shortly after the accident and referred to the Surgical Clinic at the Out Patients Department of the Princess Alexandria Hospital. The medical history on the file reveals that Ms Fleming visited Dr Gibbs in St Martin on the 24th June 2000. At that time, his report states that when he saw her, she complained of amnesia, abnormal equilibrium, dizziness, falling down and facial pain. In conclusion in his report, Dr Gibbs stated that she had a fracture of the maxillary bone, occipital hematoma and a lesion of the face under the right eye. He diagnosed her with mental disorder describing Ms Fleming as "strange acting, talkative, disorganized, anemia" Dr Gibbs also diagnosed a neurological disorder as "dizziness, numerous falls, weakness, drowsiness" and stated that her disability was total, not being in any normal physical working condition. On the 16 th December 2000, Dr Gibbs certified that Ms Fleming was suffering from a sequellae of skull brain traumatism with headaches and dizziness with blackouts and unconsciousness and that this was a disablement which was likely to remain permanent and hence that she was likely to remain permanently incapable or work as a result. [7] In the latest medical report on file from Dr Gibbs on the 28 th August 2006, he states that clinical repercussions since the accident include dizziness, drowsiness, intermittent loss of memories, obesity and loss of monthly periods. He states that this is a consequence of severe cranial traumatism and refers to the reports submitted and mentioned herein before.

Ms Fleming in a witness statement dated the 8 th May 2003, speaks of the pain following the accident. She relates the problems she had with dizziness and falling down and difficulty in remembering things, she also talks of the loss of sensation in her hands and states that she has not menstruated since the accident. Ms Fleming also states that she has not been able to go back to work since the accident as she can not move around as she used to and is afraid of what she would do on a job. Prior to the accident, Ms Fleming states that she used to go dancing and that she no longer does this. She also states that she is unable to do much housework and cooking as she would drop things and has even burnt herself. She says she would love to go back to work but she is afraid of the "senseless stuff' that she would do at the job. The quality of her life has undergone a dramatic change. [91 Counsel for the Defendant has filed very detailed submissions in relation to the quantum of damages and I have taken into consideration several factors which would necessarily exclude the points she makes in relation to the analysis of the doctors' reports and Ms Flemings injuries. (a) (b) (c) (d) The claim was not defended and hence there is no dispute of the facts or the evidence in support of the claim CPR 2000 Part 10.6 details additional specific procedures to be followed in relation to the defence of a claim for personal injuries where medical reports are attached to the claim and are disputed CPR 2000 Part 12.13 limits the matters to which a defendant can be heard unless a judgment in default is set aside to a. an application for default judgment where the claim is for some other remedy as the court considers the claimant to be entitled to on the statement of claim b. Costs c, Enforcement of the judgment d, The time of payment of any judgment The defendant by consent in the order of the 12th December 2002, agreed to the admission of the doctors' reports without the calling of the doctors, It is therefore not open to Counsel for the Defendant at this point to raise points on the, medical findings or qualifications of the doctors and as such these submissions will be disregarded to the extent that they question the credentials of the doctors or their diagnoses, [101 In all the circumstances, I consider as a reasonable award of general damages the sum of EC$80,OOO.00. SPECIAL DAMAGES Loss of Earnings

[11 J Ms Fleming claims loss of earnings from the date of the accident on the 29 th August 1999 to the date of the filing of the claim on the 11 th October 2001, a period of 110 weeks. She claims that she earned EC$450.00 per week as a Restaurant Manager. She subsequently states in her witness statement of 8 th May 2003 that at the time of the accident she was a restaurant assistant manager and that she earned between US$80.00 and US$120.00 per week service charge of approximately US$118.00 per month. A letter from the Social Security Board in May 2004 states that Ms Fleming's earnings for the month of August 1999 were EC$947.30 which suggests an average that month of EC$236.00 or US$87.00 per week. [12] Counsel for the Defendant has referred me to the discrepancies in the evidence of the Claimant however, I am persuaded that whatever she did, she earned a salary at the time of her accident and the Social Security Board satisfies me that she was employed at Ripples at the time. I also accept Ms Fleming's evidence that she earned service charge of approximately US$118.00 per month and set as a reasonable average, her weekly earnings, at US$90.00 per week. I would therefore average her weekly income inclusive of service charges at US$120.00 or EC$321.60 per week. Counsel for the Defendant did point out that there is no evidence that Ms Fleming attempted to work after the accident, however, the Claimant has exhibited a Medical Certificate of Permanent Incapacity for Work dated the 16th December 2000 and has received Invalidity Benefits from the Social Security Board from 18th December 2000 to May 8th 2004. [13J I therefore calculate Ms Fleming's lost earnings between from time of the accident to the date of the filing of the claim to be in the sum of EC$33,446.40. From this sum I will deduct the invalidity payments paid to her from December 2000 to the date of the filing of the claim in October 2001 in the sum of EC$6,900.00, the final amount under this head being EC$26,546.40 Traveling and medical expenses [14] Ms Fleming claims US$572.00 for twenty three return trips from Anguilla to St Martin as well as bus fares to and from the doctor's office. She also claims medical expenses in the sum of EC$8, 11 0.22. Counsel for the Defendant submits that Ms Fleming has submitted no referral to see a doctor in St Martin. In addition she has submitted no evidence that she even traveled to St Martin. It does however appear from the medical reports of Dr Gibbs, that he saw her on the 9 th September 1999 and the 16th December 2000. There is also evidence that Ms Fleming did a CT scan and chest X-ray and paid for these on the 11th September 1999 and also there are three receipts from a showing that Ms Fleming paid out $US 403.75 around that time in St Martin. [15] The evidence in support of the claim for these expenses is poor. It is unintelligible and has different writings on the prescriptions and it is difficult to say the least, to ascertain if, how or when if any payments were made. Some of the receipts pre date the actual incident and there is no evidence of travel expense. The claim is not sufficiently or satisfactorily proven to a great extent. Upon perusal of the evidence and having regard to the submissions, the following expenses will be awarded as special damages under this head. I accept that the Claimant did indeed St Martin to see Dr Gibbs, there is evidence that she

had seen this doctor before and to visit St Martin from Anguilla is not an unusually exorbitant way of life for most persons from Anguilla and as such I award the sum of US$200.00 or EC$533.60 as a reasonable award to meet the travel expenses. [16J The following medical expenses will be awarded; (a) Hospital charges in Anguilla and 10% late fee EC$749.76 (b) CT scan and chest X-ray US$191.00 (c) Hospital charges in Anguilla EC$ 75.40 (d) Prescription US$103.75 (e) Doctor's fees US$150.00 (f) Full body scan US$150.00 (g) Anguilla Hospital EC$ 16.50 (h) Anguilla Dental Unit EC$ 15.00 (i) Friendly Island Drug Store US$ 12.45 (k) Anguilla Dental Unit EC$ 10.00 (I) Friendly Island Drug Store US$ 25.35 (m) Doctor's fees US$650.00 (n) Anguilla Hospital EC$10.80 --------------------------------------- Total EC$877.46 US$1,282.55 The accepted rate of exchange between the parties is 2.68. US$1,282.55 x 2.68 = EC$3,437.23. The award of special damages for medical expenses is EC$4,314.69 and when this is added to the award for travel expenses of EC$533.60, the total award under this head is EC$4,848.29 Loss of Future Earnings [17] I accept the evidence of the Claimant and Dr Gibbs that she has been unable to work since the accident and is incapable of work in the future. The parties have agreed that a multiplier of 12 is acceptable in the circumstances taking into account the imponderables and vicissitudes of life. Ms Fleming's earnings have been averaged at EC$321.60 per week which would amount to EC$1,286,40 monthly. Using a multiplier of 12, I would therefore calculate her loss of future earnings in the sum of EC1286,40 x 12 months x 12 years in the total sum of EC$185,241.60. This figure is discounted to reflect the invalidity payments from November 2001 to May 2004 in the sum of EC$20,280.00 which amounts to EC$164,921.60. This figure is further discounted by 10% to take into account the lump sum payment which leaves a total award of EC$148,429,44. Future Medical treatment [18] The claim under this head is unsubstantiated by any evidence and as such an award is disallowed Interest and costs

[19] Interest is awarded to a claimant in a personal injuries case on the sum awarded for special damages from the date of the accident to the date of the assessment. Interest on this sum is calculated from the date of the service of the claim form to the date of assessment at the rate of a short-term investment. After judgment, the claimant is entitled to the full amount awarded at the statutory rate of 5%. [20J Costs in this claim are as prescribed under Part 65.5(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules 2000. This claim was determined by default judgment on the 22 nd November 2002. The damages to be awarded are EC$80,000.00 general damages, special damages of EC$31,394.69 and loss of future earnings of EC$148,429,44 amounting to the sum of EC$259,824.13 in total. In keeping with Appendix B, costs amount to EC$47,482,41, which is to be reduced to 60% as the claim concluded prior to trial but included the assessment of damages. This amounts to costs in the sum of EC$28,489,45 which sum is further discounted in accordance with Civil Procedure Rules 2000, Parts 65.5(4) and 64.6(4),(5) and (6) to reflect time elapsed and non compliance by parties with the order for assessment to the sum of EC$20,000.00. Summary of Order [21] In summary, the following is the order on the assessment of damages:- The defendant will pay the sum of EC$80,000.00 as the global award for general damages to the claimant. 2. The defendant will pay, in addition, the sum of EC$31,394.69 as special damages to the claimant for loss of earnings and medical and travel expenses 3. Additionally, the defendant will pay future loss of earnings to the claimant in the sum of EC$148,429,44 4. The defendant will pay interest at the rate of 3% on the sum of EC$31,394.69 from the date of the accident on 29 th August 1999 to date of the hearing of the assessment on 24th October 2006 5. The defendant will pay interest on the total judgment sum of EC$259,824.13 at the rate of 5% per annum from 24th October 2006 until payment. 6. The defendant will pay costs in these proceedings in the sum of EC$20,000.00 CHERYL MATHURIN MASTER