By -

Key decisions

  • Amaca Pty Limited v Latz; Latz v Amaca Pty Limited [2018] HCA 22
  • Rozenblit v Vainer [2018] HCA 23
  • CRI028 v The Republic of Nauru [2018]HCA 24
  • Trkulja v Google LLC [2018]HCA 25
  • DL v The Queen [2018] HCA 26
  • Minogue v Victoria [2018] HCA 27
  • Lane v The Queen [2018] HCA 28


Personal injury – assessment of damages – future losses

In Amaca Pty Limited v Latz; Latz v Amaca Pty Limited [2018] HCA 22 (orders 11 May 2018; reasons 13 June 2018) the High Court held that damages to be awarded to Mr Latz should include amounts he would have received under his superannuation pension, but not his age pension. Mr Latz is 71 and has been diagnosed with terminal malignant mesothelioma. When diagnosed, he had retired from the public service and was receiving both a superannuation pension under the Superannuation Act 1988 (SA) and an age pension under the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth). He brought proceedings against Amaca, for whom he had worked installing asbestos fencing some 40 years earlier. Amaca did not dispute liability. Mr Latz argued that, but for his illness, he would have continued to receive both the superannuation pension and the age pension for the remainder of his pre-illness life expectancy – around 16 years.

You've reached the end of this article preview

There's more to read! Subscribe to LSJ today to access the rest of our updates, articles and multimedia content.

Subscribe to LSJ

Already an LSJ subscriber or Law Society member? Sign in to read the rest of the article.

Sign in to read more