Issued under section 6.23 of the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017

The amount of the claimant for damages is approved in the total amount of $280,000.

1. Helen Le Huray (the claimant) is an 80-year-old woman who was severely injured in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 31 July 2024. She was in the driveway of her home when the driver of the insured vehicle unintentionally caused the vehicle he was driving to impact with the claimant. She sustained serious injuries.
2. The claimant then lodged an Application for Personal Injury Benefits and has been actively liaising with the insurer in respect to treatment for her injuries, rehabilitation and resolution of her Common Law claim. It ought to be said at the outset that the claimant has shown great courage and stoicism in dealing with very serious injuries. The insurer has shown great compassion and empathy for her circumstances and provided meaningful and attentive assistance with her rights and entitlements under the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017 (MAI Act).
3. The claimant sustained facial fractures, fractures in her cervical spine, her lumbar spine, her right clavicle, rib fractures and a severe injury to her right foot. The report of Dr P. Khong dated 17 October 2024 states that the claimant:

"is making gradual progress. She complains of generalised neck pain but does not like her collar. The L2 fracture demonstrates some further collapse - which is expected - the alignment is satisfactory."

1. He further notes the pain in worse with walking and is adversely affecting her sleep and activities of daily living.
2. The most difficult injury to manage is the fractured right hemi pelvis which has caused a bladder injury and required a reduction of her pelvis with internal fixation. This causes her significant and ongoing pain and discomfort although she has shown great strength in making a moderately well recovery from this very serious injury.

1. The claimant has identified that she has suffered some age related cognitive impairment and consequently has made an enduring guardian appointment for her son, James Rockwell Le Huray, and her daughter, Jennifer Helen Johns, to be her guardians. The enduring guardian order dated 21 January 2025 notes the guardians may act jointly and separately. Her son James was present at the telephone conference and has authorised the proposed resolution of this matter.

1. The proposed settlement figure of $280,000 simply represents the claimant's entitlement to non-economic loss. That is, there is no claim for past or future economic loss. The insurer has conceded her injuries have exceeded 10% whole person impairment, at the insurer's suggestion that the claimant lodged an application for common law for damages on

16 October 2024 and discussions have taken place between the claimant's attorney and the insurer. The proposed figure of $280,000 is compensation for non-economic loss. That is, what has formerly been known as general damages or pain and suffering. It represents compensation for the claimant's past and future loss of enjoyment of her life as a result of the very significant injuries she sustained. 2. There are a number of considerations to take into account when ascertaining as to whether or not a figure for non-economic loss is an appropriate figure to resolve the claim. These can include, but not limited to, the severity of the claimant's injuries, the consequences for the claimant as a result of the injuries, the age of the claimant and the manner in which the claimant has dealt with the sequalae of the injuries sustained. In my view a figure of $280,000 can reasonably described as at "higher end of the scale" of the likely range of damages which would be awarded to her were the matter to be assessed. It follows that I have no hesitation in approving the proposed settlement figure. 3. I note both the claimant and her son James, acting as her guardian in this matter, consider the lump sum settlement figure to be appropriate. In fact the claimant's guardian has indicated that it is higher than they would have anticipated. Whilst it is less than 12 months post-accident the parties have been diligent in seeking to resolve the claim for damages expeditiously and this has occurred. 4. It ought to be noted that the insurer has acted expeditiously and attentively and with compassion in this matter. The very expeditious resolution of the claim is reflective of the empathy and diligence which the insurer has shown in this matter. I note both parties have requested that I approve this settlement and I have no hesitation in doing so.

1. The settlement of the claim for damages of $280,000 is approved.