Dillon v Nominal Defendant & Ors [2005] QSC 232
State Reporting Bureau
]2CC6) QSC £33
Queensland Government
Department of Justice and Attorney-General
rvi
Transcript of Proceedings
Copyright in this transcript is vested in the Crown. Copies thereof must not be made or sold without the written authority
of the Director, State Reporting Bureau.
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CIVIL JURISDICTION
JONES J
REVISED COPIES ISSUED
State Reporting Bureau
Date: 3 August, 2005
Claim No 570 of 2003
PAULINE MARGARET DILLON Plaintiff
and
JAHLEEL HLIWA GILL BY HER LITIGATION Second Plaintiff
GUARDIAN PAULINE MARGARET DILLON
and
SASKIA INGRID GILL BY HER LITIGATION Third Plaintiff
GUARDIAN PAULINE MARGARET DILLON
and
NOMINAL DEFENDANT
and
JOHN JOSEPH MARANO
and
FAI ALLIANZ LIMITED (ACN 094 802 525)
First Defendant
Second Defendant
Third Defendant
CAIRNS
.. DATE 02/08/2005
JUDGMENT
EARNING: The publication of information or details likely to lead to the identification of persons in some proceedings is a criminal
affence. This is so particularly in relation to the identification of children who are involved in criminal proceedings or proceedings for
■heir protection under the Child Protection Act 1999, and complainants in criminal sexual offences, but is not limited to those
:ategories. You may wish to seek legal advice before giving others access to the details of any person named in these proceedings.
1
lh Floor, The Law Courts, George Street, Brisbane, Q. 4000 Telephone: (07) 3247 4360 Fax: (07) 3247 5532
-- 1 of 5 --
HIS HONOUR: This is the matter of Dillon and Nominal
Defendant. The applicants Jahleel Hliwa Gill and Saskia
Ingrid Gill were, at the relevant time, the dependent children
of Damien David Gill who died on the 2nd of December 2000.
Each of the applicants claim loss of dependency consequent
upon his death and now seek the sanction of the settlement of
claims for damages for loss of dependency made on their
behalf.
The applicants, both of whom were infants, were born
respectively on the 17th of June 1992 and the 27th of October
1999, and were thus five years and one year respectively at
the date of death of their father. The claim by the applicants
was joined to a claim by their mother, Pauline Dillon, who was
also dependent upon the earnings of the deceased.
The circumstances in which Mr Gill died cannot be established
with any certainty. On the night in question he was found in
an injured state in a laneway near to his home in Mossman,
Queensland. His injuries were consistent with his having been
run over by a motor vehicle, which was never identified, but
his position on the roadway could never be established. It
seems that the injuries were caused by a low impact collision.
Consequently, one can only speculate at the circumstances
which led to these injuries.
What has been established with precision is that the deceased
had consumed a considerable quantity of alcohol. Post-mortem
testing showed he had a blood alcohol percentage of 0.289 per
02082005 T17/LET M/T CNS2/2005 (Jones J)
1
10
20
30
40
50
2 JUDGMENT 60
-- 2 of 5 --
1
02082005 T17/LET M/T CNS2/2005 (Jones J)
cent. So, there were various suggestions that were put
forward as might be potential findings of a Court if the
matter went to trial. One of these was that the deceased was
lying on the carriageway before being run over. The second
was that he might have been standing before being knocked or
pushed to the ground by an unidentified vehicle. Different
scenarios, of course, would result in different levels of
contributory negligence being found against him.
In all the circumstances the potential for a substantial
finding of contributory negligence against the deceased was
quite high. The ultimate settlement reflects an allowance of
approximately 50 per cent on this account. I have had the
benefit of reading a detailed opinion by Mr Glen of counsel
which refers in detail to the evidence and to the relevant
authorities, and this leads me to conclude that the allowance
made is well within the appropriate range.
The deceased was 36 years of age at the time of his death. He
was a preschool teacher of some years standing and was
intending to continue in that occupation. At the date of his
death his net weekly income was $845. This rate of
remuneration for a person in his position has increased in the
intervening years and, as well, the deceased had some
prospects for promotion.
Mr Glen of counsel, in an extensive opinion, has analysed the
likely household income for the past period and for the
future, the expenses of the household, and the likely funds to
10
20
30
40
50
3 JUDGMENT 60
-- 3 of 5 --
be attributed to the needs of the applicants and their mother
for these past and future periods. The opinion takes account
of the relevant variables in an assessment of this kind and
has led the author to an assessment of approximately $600,000.
That allowance is well within the appropriate range which
might have been arrived at upon a contested hearing. The
settlement amount for all claimants of $295,000 is appropriate
in the circumstances. The apportionment of 23 per cent of
that amount to Jahleel and 30 per cent to Saskia is
appropriate to their entitlements, and I accordingly sanction
the settlement arrived on their behalves.
It is proposed that the funds ordered to the infants be
invested in a trust fund to be held by the Trust Company of
Australia Limited. Details of the expenses associated with
the institution and maintenance of that trust fund have been
detailed and these will be borne additionally by the
defendants .
In all those circumstances I am prepared to sanction the
settlement, and I will make orders in terms of the draft
initialled by me and placed with the papers.
02082005 T17/LET M/T CNS2/2005 (Jones J)
1
10
20
30
40
50
4 JUDGMENT 60
-- 4 of 5 --
02082005 T17/LET M/T CNS2/2005 (Jones J)
HIS HONOUR: In addition to the written orders which I have 1
initialled and placed with the papers I order that the three
opinions of Mr Glen of counsel be placed in a envelope to be
sealed and marked "Not to be opened except with the leave of
the Court."
20
30
40
50
5 JUDGMENT 60
-- 5 of 5 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QSC/2005/232