Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Papua New Guinea Law Reports

Kuriti v The State [1988-89] PNGLR 633 (5 June 1989)

Papua New Guinea Law Reports - 1988-89

[1988-89] PNGLR 633 - Peter Kuriti v The State�

[1988-89] PNGLR 633

N722

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

KURITI

V

THE INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA

Mount Hagen

Woods J

8-9 May 1989

5 June 1989

DAMAGES - Personal injuries - Particular awards of general damages - Left arm injury - Dog bite - Skin grafts - Minor scarring and disfiguration - Motor sensory deficiency - Thirty per cent disability of forearm - Left-handed - Some limitation in gardening and sport - Church youth worker and subsistence farmer - Male aged 27 (29 at trial) - Award of K9,000 for general damages.

The plaintiff, a male aged 27 (29 at trial) employed as a church youth co-ordinator and supporting himself with cash crop vegetable gardening, was injured as a result of being savaged by a police dog on the left arm. The lacerations required skin grafts and resulted in minor disfiguration and scarring with motor and sensory deficiency in the hand leaving him with about a 30 per cent disability in the forearm. The plaintiff, who was left-handed, was limited in the gardening work he could do and in playing some sports.

Held

General damages for pain and suffering and loss of amenities should be assessed at K9,000.

Cases Cited

Anis Wambia v The Independent State of Papua New Guinea [1980] PNGLR 567.

Kaka Kopun v The Independent State of Papua New Guinea [1980] PNGLR 557.

Kokonas Kandapak v The Independent State of Papua New Guinea [1980] PNGLR 573.

Pep v Yamba [1987] PNGLR 485.

Statement of Claim

This was an action in which the plaintiff sought to recover damages for personal injuries suffered as a result of being savaged by a police dog.

Counsel

J Pakau, for the plaintiff.

L Tilto, for the defendant.

Cur adv vult

5 June 1989

WOODS J: On 16 April 1987, the plaintiff was riding in the back of a Datsun utility when it was pulled up by the police. The driver of the vehicle ran off and the plaintiff remained in the vehicle and was set upon by a police dog which savaged his left arm.

Liability is admitted by the State. The plaintiff was admitted to Mt Hagen Hospital for treatment of the wound which involved skin grafts to cover the wound. A photograph of the wound shows a severe laceration and even today the visible signs are there of a minor disfiguration and scar. Dr Kulunga has confirmed a motor and sensory deficiency in his hand and has estimated a 30 per cent permanent disability with use of his left forearm. The plaintiff is left-handed.

At the time of the incident, the plaintiff was working casually as a garage attendant to earn money to attend a Seventh Day Adventist Youth Conference in Australia. Although he had to terminate his casual work as a result of his accident, he was still able to attend the conference. Otherwise he is District Youth Co-ordinator of the Seventh Day Adventist Church. He supports himself with cash crop vegetable gardening in his village. He says he now has limited use of his left arm because of the loss of power and the sensory loss and he still gets some pain. He is 29 years of age and through his youth work was involved in sport. He says he is now unable to play sport.

Whilst the initial injury and hospitalisation and the permanent scar are obvious, it is very hard to itemise the general loss now being suffered by the plaintiff. He can still do a certain amount but may have some minimal limitation in heavy work in the garden. With respect to sport, I cannot see how at his age his injury would prevent him continuing in a co-ordinating or coaching role especially as he is a Youth Co-ordinator.

I am unable to particularise any specific economic loss but will include such in the figure for general damages as loss of amenities.

Analogous cases in recent years include Kaka Kopun v The Independent State of Papua New Guinea [1980] PNGLR 557, which involved a fractured left arm resulting in a permanent deformity because of misalignment in union and a considerably reduced power of grip. General damages there were assessed at K25,000. The case Anis Wambia v The Independent State of Papua New Guinea [1980] PNGLR 567 involved a broken leg which took over a year to heal but involved no permanent disability and was assessed at K5,000 general damages plus economic loss for the year he was unable to work in his garden.

The case Kokonas Kandapak v The Independent State of Papua New Guinea [1980] PNGLR 573 involved a fractured upper arm with damages to the ulna nerve causing claw hand deformity. Damages for pain and suffering were assessed at K10,000.

The case Pep v Yamba [1987] PNGLR 485 involved a broken arm with 50 per cent loss of function of the arm. General damages there were assessed at K15,000 with other amounts for economic loss.

All the above cases involved more severe injuries than the plaintiff before me now.

I assess K9,000 for general damages and apportion K2,000 to the part on which interest will run at 8 per cent from the date of issue of the writ till today. Interest therefore comes to K251.18.

I order judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of K9,251.18.

Judgment for K9,251.18

Lawyer for the plaintiff. Joseph K Pakau.

Lawyer for the State: State Solicitor.