Jones v Gleeson: 1965

(Australia) When a policeman who had retired retired through injury sought damages for that injury, the pension he received as a result of his retirement was to be ignored entirely: ‘In recent years, however, the relevance or otherwise to the issue of damages of the fact that an injured person is entitled to a pension has been considered by this Court on several occasions (see Paff v. Speed; The National Insurance Co. of New Zealand, Ltd. v. Espagne, and Graham v. Baker n) and a very different view has been taken from that which is expressed in the majority judgments in Browning’s case.’

(1965) 39 ALJR 258, [1966] ALR 235
CitedPaff v Speed 6-Apr-1961
(High Court of Australia) ‘The first consideration is what is the nature of the loss or damage which the plaintiff says he has suffered.’
Damages – Personal injuries – Matters to be considered in reduction of damages – Plaintiff policeman at . .

Cited by:
CitedParry v Cleaver CA 9-May-1967
The plaintiff policeman was hit by a car whilst he was on traffic duty. When he claimed damages in negligence the defendant sought to have deducted from his award an amount received by way of additional pension payments received which had been . .
CitedParry v Cleaver HL 5-Feb-1969
PI Damages not Reduced for Own Pension
The plaintiff policeman was disabled by the negligence of the defendant and received a disablement pension. Part had been contributed by himself and part by his employer.
Held: The plaintiff’s appeal succeeded. Damages for personal injury were . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 23 November 2021; Ref: scu.237511